The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-05-27
Motions to Quash Indictments.

Attempts We're made in court Satur-
day To quash the indictments in three
of the big cases in which true bills
were returned by the last grand jury.
They are the case in which General
Manager Frank Silliman. of the Scran
ton Railway company, is charged with
bribing Old Forge councilmen: the case
In which General Manager :. T.. Way
land, of the Lackawanna Telephone
company, is charged with obstructing
Justice by refusing to answer certain
questions plop0unded to him in the
councimanic bribery hearings before
Alderman Fuller. and the ease in which
NJ. w. Guernsey charges j. w. Glern-
sey. NJ. r. Keller and Charles w. Ben
nett with conspiracy and diSsuading
witnesses.
Major Everett Warren conducted the
assault on the Indictment in the Sill
man case. The chief reason on whicr
the demurrer relies is that there is no
avermcnt in the Indictment setting
forth that any ordinance was pending.
at the time of the alleged bribery. con-
cerninG which thcr" could be any
bribery.
Lengthy arguments w"r" made in
support of and against the motion to
luash. District Attorney w Il. Lewis
opposed the motion. judge Kelly took
the papers.
In the Wayland case, the motion To
1uash was represented by Major War
rem and Joseph O'Brien. The reasons
assigned were in substance that the
Indictment does not follow the tran
script on which it was founded. in that
II omits grounds upon which the de-
'endant refused to answer: that the
transcript fails to show an unlawful
obstruction of justice. or that the de-
'endant contemporary refused tn an
'wer; that the questions set forth in
he indictment show that the defend
INT would tend to inCriminate himself
nad he answered them, that The de-
,cndant Is relieved from answering
hoSe questions under the state and
'ederal constitutions, because the an
'wers would tend to mcriminatc him:
hat the alderman Is not shown 10
iavc had jurisdiction in the divers
'auscs" referred to in the indictment: (:
hat no particular cause is alleged to
iaVe been in course of trial; that no
acts are set forth showing that the
'ertain defendants named We're being
lcd for bribery: that ii is not shown
lldl Il i'Sui oilil WAS administered,
hat although Section -, Article III, of
he constitution of PENNSYLVANIA says
he defendant should answer. notwith-
landing that his answers would tend
incriminate him, he is relieved from
answering when he takes refuge he
ind the declaration of rights and -four
zenith amendment To the United States
constitution, because the latter say he
eed not answer, and are superior To
nc state constitution.
II is then set forth that the aforesaid
ection 81. Article III, of the state con-
titution is not self-acting and no law
as been passed 10 make it operative.
nd that il does not apply 10 hearings
efore justices of the peace and alder
len.
District Attorney Lewis and T.. g.
sewcomb. representing the Municipal
sague. argued against the motion to
uash. Judge Kelly took the papers.
John +. ScragG and Major Warren
appeared for and District Attorney
lewis against the demurrer TO the in
lictments in the Guernsey ease. The
.ttacks on the indictments are all of