The Kalispell bee. [volume] (Kalispell, Mont.) 1901-1901, 1901-04-12
Jury Acquitted Lehman After
Several Hours Debate.
EVDENCEINSUFFICIENT
A New Charge Of Rape Has Been
Charged Against Him by the
Oldest Daughter.

The jury in the Lehman case did not
reach verdict until nearly 8 O'Clock
last night. Shortly after O'Clock
theL asked for further instructions as
to the consideration of the acts of the
accused toward his daughter, prior to
the time Charged in the information.
OF course the court was unable to COM
ply with the request and the jury was
obliged to worry along without the
desired information. Unuer the evil
ence ami the law there was nothing
left for them but to return a verdict If
acquittal. The informaIlon charged
that tue onense had been committed
on certain date at the henning ranch
and the evidence went to show that
IN that date neither the accused nor
the accuser were at the Henning
ranch. It was perfect alibi. The
prosecution was flagrantly inefficient
and showed lack Of preparation at ev-
cry turn. Probably no lawyer ever
heard in similar case, such language
| as the county attorney found it neces
sary to employ in order to get the
story of the offense from the complain
ing witness. It is earnestly to re
hoped that time and experience will
enable the county attorney to improve
his methods. They are sadly in
need of it. The jury came into court
with verdict of acquittal, but the de-
PENDANT was Immediately re-arested on
charge of rape with the older girl,
Annie, being the victim. Lehman was
arraigned on this charge before A.
Macarthur, J. p, this morning, and
bound over for trial in the district
court in the sum of $4,000 bail, which
he was unable to furnish.
This morning was the time set for
the sentencing of James Patton, con-
victed Of murder in the second degree
for the killing of Pat Carroll. Attor-
ney Logan gave as legal reason why
sentence should not be pronounced,
the alleged grounds that Patton has
good foundation for new trial. He
asked that the record be made to
show this and that the court steno-
grapher be instructed to prepare a
transcript of the testimony in nara
tive form, for the use of the defend
| ant, and at the expense of the county.
l These rnnnnCfC GRO of Cd hxy %h1
court and sentence was then passed
in accordance with the verdict of the
jury-ten years in the state peniten-
tiary at hard labor.
Daniel Bryan, who pleaded guilty 70
the charge of burglarizing the saloon
of John Doe, last December, and who
| was only arrested after he had been
| winged" by a shot from the revolver
of Officer Eakright, was then told to
stand up. His counsel, M. D. Bald
win, made plea for clemency on be-
half of his client, but County Attor-
ney Oliver said that under the cir
cumstances he could not recommend
it.. Judge Smith heard both lawyers
and the defendant himself, patiently,
and then said that he proposed to have
it understood that criminals should
receive no encouragement in his court.
He imposed sentence of five vars
in the penitentiary.
The damage case of F. w. Ferguson
against the Great Northern railway
company was then called. Fergu-
son seeks to recover 1899 for person
al injuries received while employed as
assistant hostler at the round house at
Blackfoot, about year and a half
ago. A jury was secured with little
difficulty. The plaintiff is represent
ed by Attorneys Swaney and McKeown
and the defendant company by J..
Parker Veazey, Of Great Falls, and
w. N. Noffsinger, of this city. The
case is in progress as we 60 to press.
The case of Martin Turk against the
Great Northern for damages for stock
killed, was called and jury empanel-
led, but before many questions were
asked of the first witness the attorney
for the company sobjected on the
ground that the questions were not in
line with the compliant. The court
sustained the objection and Attorney
Swaney was given ten days il which
to amend his complaint and Mr.. Noft.
singer the same time to reply. The
case will then be tried by the court
without jury.
The case of E. c. 3iganess against
James Freeman, went by default, the
defendant not appearing. The court
heard the testimony for the plaintif
and gave him judgment as prayed for
namely $425, interest and costs.