The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-06-07

owing to the absence of District At
torncy Jones, the LeXow cases against
f.. J. Maloney and II. r. Fellows,
charged with bribery, and Martin Clark
charged with conspiracy to compound
misdemeanor, were put over to the
October term of court.
The cases were scheduled on ycster-
days list and when they were reached
Assistant District Attorney Thomas
moved to have them continued, saying
that, as Mr.. Jones had prepared them,
he was wholly unfamiliar with them
and considering their unusual import
ance he did not wish to undertake their
prosecution.
Major Everett Warren and Joseph
OBrien, attorneys for Messrs. Maloney
and Fellows, and NJ. A. Mckinley, at
torncy for Clark, strenuously opposed
a continuance. At the last term of
court the commonwealth had exercised
its prerOgative of continuing a case
once without assigning reasons, the de-
PENDANTS counsel pointed out, and a
second continuance could not be legally
allowed, unless good and sufficient rca-
sons were shown. No such reasons had
been advanced, they contended, and the
second postponement should not be per-
mitted.
Judge Edwards said that, while there
was no doubt that the defendants were
entitled to speedy trial, he felt that
under the circumstances continuance
ought to be granted, and allowed Mr.
Thomas notion The witnesses on
both sides had been subpoenaed and
were present.
THE AMEs CASE.
1t is expected that the case Of Banker
e. f. Ames, of Forest City, against his
neighbOr, DR.. c. II. Knapp, and that
of County Detective LeyshOn against
the bankers wife, Mrs. Anna +. Ames,
will be reached today. They were
scheduled for trial yesterday but were
delayed by a movement on the part Of
Attorney John +. Scragg, counsel for
the defendants, to quash the indict-
ment against DR.. Knapp. on the ground
that it was founded on testimony by
Mr.. Ames and that he was an incom-
petent witness by reason of the fact
that his wife was involved in the crime,
ana under the law a husband can not
testify against his wife in a charge OF
this nature. The reasons in full are:
First-Bccausc the warrant for the arrest OF
the defendant was issued upon the oath and in
formation of L. f. Amcs. the husband of the
woman with whom the defendant is char Gcd with
having committed said crime. The said +. i.
Ames, hv reason Of being the husband OF said
Anna Amcs, being incompetent to make oath or
procure the information.
SaCond-Bccauso the warrant for the arrest Of
the defendant issued contrary to the provs-
ions of the constitution Of the United States
llI Of lp al 4 bpfU
lao legal complaint by any competent person
signed, etc, required by said constitutions.
Judge Edwards refused to quash the
Indictment, and the defendant filed Il
bill of exceptions. The cases were put
over till today to accommodate Mr..
ScrHgg.
DR. Knapp and Mrs Ames are
charged with having Illicit relations.
They were surprised in the same room
of central city hotel by Mr.. Ames
and a police officer several weeks ago.
a $4,000 damage suit has been insti-
tuted in Luzerne county by Mr.. Ames
against DR.. Knapp.
VERDICT FROM ELEVEN.
Rather than have a disagreement
and the expense of a new trial. the
commonwealth accepted a verdict of
eleven in the assault and battery case
in which James and Martin Duffy and
Patrick and John Flaherty were
charged with assault and battery
upon Special officer o. ID. Brink.
The jury went out at 10 o'clock and
came in at noon and asked to be dis
charged, saying they could not agree.
Judge Savage sent them back to make
another effort Just before adjourn
ment they returned with the same
story The vote was II to l in favor
of verdict of mot guilty but pay
the costs b. G. Morgan, of West
Scranton, was the minority juror. Jo-
seph O'Brien, attorney for the de-
fcnse, asked that the verdict of the
eleven be taken, and Acting Assistant
District Attorney Ross being agree
able. the cOdrt ordered the verdict
oi the eleven entered.
Julies were out in two alleged speak