The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-05-30
ALL LINES GUARDED
Extra Precautions Have Been Taken
In Gardeners Case.
SOME SURPRISES PROMISED
But Witnesses Are Watched and
ThereHl BE No linking of
Their Testimony.


day, and the work of taking evidence will
begin tomorrow morning. Gardner is
. special police officer. and is said to be
the man to whom the administration en-
trusted the collection of protection money
from criminals. The indictment under
which he is to be tried tomorrow ac-a
cuses him of having accepted a~bribe OF
$500, in return for which he is alleged
to have promised to protect members tof
the "big mitt combine" from police in
reference. w $50
The state has bent every energy toward
securing conviction in this case. 1t Is
the first Of several bribery cases against
various police officials, and Assistant
County Attorney AL J. Smith, the prose-
cutting officer, is a thorough believer in
the old adage well begun is half done.
He believes that Gardner's conviction will
give MIN a strong leverage for use in the
trials to follow and he is confident that,
with the evidence already at hand, con-
yiction is a practical certainty
Although the Indictment bears the
names of only two witnesses. Crossman
and Edwards, big mitt" operators. it is
known that a long list OF witnesses Will
be called. In fact, the number will prob
ably exceed two score, and the state
seems confident that their testimony will
prove lncontrovertible.
Witnesses and Jury Guarded.
To guard against the possibility of any
of these witnesses being "f1xed, those
whose testimony Is regarded as impor-
tant are being constantly Swallowed, and
any attempt to reach them will result in
arrests. The police department is said
to realize the importance of the trial,
and to be determined that witnesses
whose positions in life make them amen,
able to police interference shall be "con-
trolled.' However, any attempt along
that line can result in nothing but fall
ure as the move has been fully antici-
pated by the state. tn
There can be no doubt that the defense
knows the state has an unusually strong
case. If the expression Is permissible,
they expect to be surprised This was
clearly shown in the several attempts
made to secure a list of the witnesses to
be called, and in the demand, presented
in court. for a list of witnesses examined
by the grand jury and for the "big mitt'
ledger, in which members of the "big
mitt" gang are said to have set down
record of all money paid the police for
protection.
A feature of the case that has not
passed without notice has been the in,
dustry of Detective Charles Nelson. Nell
son has been constant in his attendance
at court. He has apparently paid atten-
ton to nothing else since court proceed
ings began, and has been in frequent con-
ference with Gardner and his attorneys.
Since the jury was completed it has
been in charge Of three deputies. These
deputies are with the jurors constantly.
They sleep at the courthouse, and, while
Judge Harrison has done everything he
can to make service upon the jury as light
as is compatible with safety, he has also
taken every precaution to guard against
the use Of undue influence. " -.
The Jury a Good One.
The jury itself is accounted one of the
best bodies OF the kind ever drawn inS
# Hennepin county for the trial of 4 mu
nicipal case. 1t was COMPLETED. at 4
o'clock yesterday afternoon. the last mar
selected being Frank ]. Halo, a book
keeper employed by the First National
bank. Mr.. Halo had no idea that he
would be permitted to serve and the ex-
preston of indignant amazement that
came over his face when he was told to
stand up and be sworn was extremely
ludicrous. -.. 81. -
When the clerk called his name he
stepped forward to the witness chair with
air of jaunty confidence.
I'VE have no challenge said Attorney
w. w. Erwin. for the defense.
"You may be sworn, Mr.. Halo" said
the assistant county attorney.
The Juror muttered something unintel-
ligible under his breath, and then stepped
up to the clerks desk where the required
oath was administered by Criminal Clerk
Royce. Not one question had been put to
him, and he looked and acted like man
who had suffered a great injustice.
The jurors who will pass upon the ques-
ton Of Mr.. Gardner"s guilt or innocence
are Louis Hogland, a farmer, whose resi-
dence is at Wayzata, Lake Minnetonka:
James w. Falconer. vice president of the
Hardwood Manufacturing company. who
resides at 1850 Park avenue; John NJ.
II
wood Hansen, civil engineer, .619 Seven
tcenth avenue N; A. Edwin Zonne, man
ager of the j.. r. Conklin & Zonne COM
pany, Lake Minnetonka: Raleigh A. Ebert
formerly employed by the Adams Elk
press company, 1929 Hawthorn avenue
and Mechanics Savings Bank; Cortis Gal
braith. photographer. 1241 Washington
avenue N; William c.. Allen, real estate
agent, 2101 Fifth avenue s; Paul Taklo
painter and paper hanger, 2219 Crystal
Lake avenue: Charles F. Grady, cooper
1921 Hiawatha avenue; and Frank j
Halo. bookee2er, 1872 Vine place. +
A Motion to Bar Testimony.
AS soon as the jury had been com
pleted yesterday afternoon Henry S
Mead. one of the attorneys for the de-
fense,- stated to the court that he de-
sired to make motion against the recep-
the motion would properly come up after
the first witness had been sworn. but ad
ded that he would be able to present his
arguments before time for adjournment
and suggested that the matter had better
be disposed Of at once.
AS this was the first instance during the
entire proceedings In which the defense
had appeared to be willing to expedite
matters, Judge Harrison looked somewhat
surprised but at once acceded to the
proposition, and Mr.. Mead began He
was armed with a small law library ant
quoted copiously from his authorities. He
objected ito the taking of testimony OF
eight specific grounds as follows:
First-That the indictment does not sta
that said Howard and Edwards had commit
ted, were committing, or were about to com
init any crime known to the common law o
to the statutes of this state.
seeond-That it does not state that the de
PENDANT knew or had any knowledge tendn
that said Howard or Edwards nrs either @
them had committed or were committing an
crime known or intended to commit an
crime known to the common law or to tn
statutes Of this state.
Third-:rhat said Indictment does not sho,
any duty, official action requirement or thin
which the defendant did or could agree O
purpose TO violate, neglect or leave undone.
Fourth-That there is no sufficient allega
ton of corporate existence of the city OF Min
neapolis by which defendant was shown to
an officer of the state.
Fifth-That there is no sufficient allega
ton that the defendant is or was pole
officer of the city of Minneapolis or acting a
such
sixth-That the said Indictment does nc