Arizona republican., 1900-07-27

ill feeling between William Halderman and Ted Moore and that Moore had threatened HaIderman's life. The evil dence of Buck Chandler would, there fore be to some extent cumulative Furthermore. I have had no evidence
 presented to me as to when the counsel
 for the Haldermans first learned Of the
 evidence of this man Buck Chandler
 nor have reasons been presented to me
 why he was not brought forward 10
 testify at the time of the trial, or why
 his affidavit was not sooner obtained and produced. Ought I to let this atfl-
 davit induce me to reverse the verdict
 and judgment of the court which heard all the testimony and had before It the witnesses in person; some evidence
 on the same points covered by this affidavit having been produced before them? I cannot see my way clear so to do. In addition to this the affidavit does not appear to me to present evil dence which would suffice to over throw the evidence contained. in the record. nor does this affidavit seem to me to be worthy of full credence."
 Tt in substance charges a conspiracy
 between the two men who were killed,
 Ainsworth and Moore. to arrest the Haldermans and then kill them. l can not believe that Moore made such a statement; nor can I think that Hal derman would have believed and acted
 upon it if it had been repeated to him by Chandler. To be of much weight it would have to be believed that Chand- | Ter told Halderman of this threat by Moore, that after he and Ainsworth had arrested the Haldermans they
 would kill them, and it would also have | to be believed that Halderman regard l ed the statement as true, and thought | that if he and his brother went with | Ainsworth and Moore they would be ! killed. I do not believe that Halder-
 man had such an idea; nor is such an | idea on his part consistent with his | testimony (Record, D. 205) that he re- l-garded Ainsworth as an innocent man, i and that no shot had been intended for him. I do not believe that l would be 1 justified on the showing made as to l this point in Chandler's affidavit, in re- versing the judgment of the courts. i The word they in relation to the 1 information, said in the affidavit, to l have been furnished the Haldermans i by Chandler, seems to be a misappre- 1 hension. Chandler spoke only of Moore and so far as is shown by the affidavit 1 did not know who was going to make l the arrest predicted by Moore. At any | rate. Ainsworth's name was not men, l tioned. The record further shows that 1 the Haldermans held neither enmity ] nor suspicion against Ainsworth, for, | ( h. aI-,-1 f1t t1.
 and told them to go into the house and i get their breakfast, they returned un- | armed and ready to go. It was at his
 kindly suggestion that they might be
 detained at Tombstone that they went ! back the second time after tobacco and | extra clothing. They plainly had no fear of the officer.
 The statement is continued, as foi- 1 lows:
 ''This brings me to the point made on 1 the affidavit of Mary Wilson that the | first shot was fired from outside the house, and that she was intimidated by her father and forced to give the tes- | timony which she gave on the trlai. On examination of the record l fnd
 that Mary Wilson testified before the l jury in the case, at the trial (Record, D. l 11O just as she now swears in this af- l fidavit, that she had been intimidated and coerced by her father into giving ! her testimony: this was on her cr8s- | examination, and all the circumstances
 of the intimidation were brought be ! fore the jury just as they are now l brought before me, except that at that ! time she said that her father had told i her to say that the Haldermans had fired the first shot, while she told him l she did not know who fired the first shot: and in the affidavit presented to | me says her father told her to say | the Haldermans fired the first shot, l while she knows the first shot came from outside the house. This discrep- ! ancy in her testimony on these two oc- casions when she was telling of the in- limitation of her by her father are not favorable to the credibility of her statements But aside from this fact, this matter is not new, it has been brought before the jury and considered
 by them in deciding the case, it has al-
 so been again brought before the trial
 court in the shape of an affidavit Of
 Mary Wilson similar to the one present. ed to me CRecord, D. 3O, and, having been pdSSeu upOll DS lllC thS NiiN
 court and the supreme court, l do not
 regard it as a subject even for my con
 sideration.
 "The same is true as to the
 affidavit of Rena Wilson which is presented to me. similar
 affidavit by her was presented to the trial court on the motion for new trial ;I Record. D. SO and passed upon by T that court, and having been so brought
 before the trial court and the supreme
 court. 1 do not regard it as my duty 10 consider the matter.
 q have now considered all the points | brought before me to lead me to eXer-
 else my pardoning power, and either
 pardon or commute the sentence If
 death passed upon William and Il Thomas Halderman.
 l ssTn addition n 70 views which