The Anaconda standard., 1898-01-17
WAS NOT A FAIR TRIAL
Position Taken by Mr.. Bloor in
His Appeal.
A REVIEW OF THE CASE
Some of the Points Made in the Brief
Objection Taken to Some of the
Remarks Made by the Pros
ecuting Attorney.


was convicted on "A charge of secrcting
the county salary reduction bill passed
by tho last Legislature and preventing it
from becoming law will come up for
argument on appeal before The supreme
court tomorrow. Since his trial Mr..
Bloor has been practicing law III Butte and
mas made many friends in the city Who
are hoping he will be able to get safely
out of his trouble. Ills attorneys are Il.
a. Carleton and 4. j. Walsh who have
prepared strong brief in the case 1t
reviews the testimony and SAYS the ap-
pellant contends that there is absolutely
no evidence in the record upon which lie
could have been convicted of the crime
attempted 10 be charged in the ndict-
ment. He WAS, during the last session of
the legislature, secretary of the senate.
The assistant secretary was H. s. rorhIv
and on the last night of the session, ow-
ing to the stress of work another assist
ant was employed, one g. j. Iangford
who was engaged in writing up records
of bills and indorSng on the back their
history contrary To the provisions of the
statute which make il he duty of the
secretary tn do that work and making it
the duty of the assistant secretary 10
take charge of all bills and file ana enter
them in the books provided for that pur-
pose. On the last night OF the session
March !, Mr. Gorhly read all the bills
and read the salary bill which came from
the house that night having been passed
by that body, and all Endorsements on it
were made by the secretary Bloor ex-
cept the last one telling of its final pas
sage, which was not in his handwriting
but which was. in fact. made by Lang
ford. the assistant. and the bin was evi-
IDENTIFY lost in his hands after its passage
by the house.
The next day. about / o'clock in the
afternoon. Corbly went to the senate
chamber, the session being meanwhile adj
iourned sine die; the defendant then tod
him he had found the missing bill in their
desk with bills which were indefinitely
postponed by the senate. Search had
been made for it about the desk of the
clerk of the house. but ii was not to be
found Afterwards the defendant went
into the house chamber. and secretly. as
the prosecution claimed, slipped the bill
into one of the pigeon holes. and later in
the afternoon went over again and pulled
ii out. pretending to have found it.
The evidence, tested by the rules ap-
plicable to the consideration Of testimony
in criminal cases says the brief mot
only does not exclude the reasonable
hypothesis that the transmission OF the
bill was simply overlooked. hut. as we
contend. the fair. if not the decided pre-
ponderance is in favor of that theory.
But we accept. again for the purpose OF
this statement, the conclusion of the de-
iNido'ii Niiihits ilfSlttifh III Sftld the Dill
to the house.
At the close of the states case the de
fendant moved the court to advise the
jury to acquit the defendant upon the
ground that there was no evidence in the
case. that the bill in question came into
the hands of the defendant by virtue of
his official position; that there was no
evidence in the case that he secreted the
bill; that there was no evidence that il he
secreted the bill that ii was done for any
illegal purpose. The motion was over
ruled by the court. The appeal takes
exceptions to improper remarks made to
the jury by the county attorney. prc1u.
dicial to the defendant. In the argument
with which the brief concludes. the de
fendants attorneys say:
I'VE desire to present to the court the
right of the defendant TO an acquitta
upon the evidence. We demand a reversal
of the Judgment on this appeal because
there is no evidence that the defendant
secreted the bill Mere inaction is not /
enough To constitute the crime charged /
Something affirmative must be done I
There must be some act of disposal How |
is 1t possible to say that during the en- |
tire session of that night the bill did not |
lie on the secfetarys table? No one +
asked for it; no one came 10 look for il. +
and no one was heard to say that had ii
been asked for at any time that night /
it would not have been forthcoming or /
that ii would not have been found where /
a bill which had passed the senate. aud I
was still in tho seeretary's hands should I
have been found Not only was there no /
evidence that the bill was secreted, but
there could have been no earthly nnr-
pose for secreting it. The very worst I
that can be charged against the defend
ant in this case is that he wilfully ne-
elected 10 send the bill to the house after
its passage by the senate
Relating To the county attorneys inn
proper remarks during his address to tile
jury. the brief says:
We ask in view of these remarks.
whether The defendant had fair trial:
whether tho strong. but restrained cur
rent of public feeling engendered By dis
closures of corruption during the session
OF the legislature at which the acts here
charged arc avetred 10 have occurred,
was not famed into whirlwind of pas
sion by such appeals. Five times tho
transsresson was 50 papably wrong that
the defendants counsel rose aud objected,
and iiNe times the court sustained the ob-
lection and admonshed the jury to disre-
gard what was said. Any person who +
has had any experience in the trial III
cases knows that he runs a serious risk
rNry time he objects 10 remarks Of on +
posing counsel. Counsel freaucntly rr- /
frain from making perfectly valid obier-
tions 10 comments Of opposing counsel (
n the fear that the jury will bc adversely
influenced by the very fact Of tho 0hiec- F
lion being made. The jury is very likely i
% believe. as they We're told by the conn-
" attorney ia this ease. that objection
was made because the comments Were
telling, and because the ease nf the on
posing counsel MAS vulnerable There
II this part IF the record ono feature
which makes tho judgment reversible
and that il that objection having heen
made 10 the gross appeal 10 the personal
interests pf the Jury in the opening ad-
1ress of The county attorney 10 the effect
hat the bin. had II become a law woui4
1aye resulted in saving To the tax
payers of Lewis and Clarke county ana
he objection having been sustained. hr
-epeated The remark. in substance. IN his
losing address