The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-05-31
torney AL ]. Smith to proceed with the

torney AL ]. Smith to proceed with the
case. g.,..,, Is. 49, a.. 3- = =.
In his opening to the jury Mr.. Smith
spoke of the gravity of the of1ense
charged. Bribery of a public official, he
said. could not but create distrust, OF au-
thority,, and thus struck a blow at the
machinery Of society, which must be re-
spected to be. effective. Continuing, he
told the jury that the state expected to
show the acceptance Of a $500 bribe by
Irwin A. Gardner, in return for which
he had promised to safeguard the men
who paid it from police interference, even
though they were criminals and should
be detected in the commission of crime.
-s- A List of Protected Workers.
The issue was one of fact. The ques-
ton the jury would be called upon to de-
eide was whether or not the money had
been turned over. On that the whole
matter hinged. He promised too, to show
that Gardner had agreed to protect" not
only Crossman and Edwards, but any
''steerers'' whom they might employ. Each
morning, Mr. Smith said, Gardner was
in the habit of going to the big mitt
joints" to obtain list of the men SO
employed so that he could live up to his
part Of the agreement. That fact he
promised to prove. =
He promised also to prove that the list
was taken to police headquarters for use
an accornplice of criminals, and the go
between through whom the bargainfngs
between these criminals and the police
were arranged. &"- f.
When Mr.. Smith had finished, W. W.
Erwin, one Of the defendants attorneys,
objected to the statement made by. the
prosecuting officer that Gardner would be
shown to be the go between between
criminals and the police and objected also
to his statements regarding the daily list
which Mr.. Smith claimed Gardner had OBJ
tanned from the big mitt" men and
which contained the names Of men VINO
had been teeced by the gang as we'll as of
'steers' who were to be protected" To
save time Mr.. Smith withdrew the state
ments. The court then instructed the
jury to pay no attention to any state
ments made by attorneys unless they were
borne out by the evidence. >.ts~
Thomas r. Brown was then sworn as
the first witness. ~ ~
Gardner's Appointment Established.
Thomas r. Brown. private, secretary to
the mayor, was the first witness called
Before he had been questioned, however,
the defense renewed its objection to the
RECEPTION o. any evidence on the grounds
already urged; and again the court over
ruled the objection. - 49, : . = ..-
Henry S. Mead, for the defense, again
made a motion for an order compelling
the county attorney to furnish him with
list Of witnesses who are to be called
in the case. Again the court declined to
grant the request.
Mr.. Brown was then permitted to testi-
fly. He said he was the mayors secretary
and in that capacity issued commissions
to special police officers under the in
structions of the mayor Such a commits
sion had been issued to Irwin A. Gardner
on Feb. Is, 1901. The defense was allowed
to note an exception to the line Of In
quiry. their point being that the COM
consequently void, notwithstanding the
fact that it had been signed by the
mayor. ....
Cross examined by Mr.. Mead, Mr. Brown
testified that Gardeners name was not on
the city pay roll that he had never re-
ported to the mayors Office for duty; that
he never, so far as Mr.. Brown knew, had
made an arrest or acted in an oficial
capacity. r., ...---. Il -.. .,-t.a. - II r.
Mr.. Smith then read the commission.
The second witness was H. N. Knott
assistant city clerk. He testified that
there was on file in his Office the bond and
oath of Irwin A. Gardner as special Off
Ger. Both documents were produced and
Identified. They were received in evi.
dence and read to the jury =. :,
civilian Edwards" was then called.
They Dickered Long.
Billy Edwards resumed his testimon,
this afternoon. He testified that no agree
ment was reached at the first conference
: between himself Crossman, Gardner ant
Norbeck. They met again the next day
but failed to reach an agreement. There
was third meeting in which the talk wa:
about theh payment Of $500 per week.
On Nov. 2 last Edwards testified that tn,
parties had an engagement for II a. m
at Thcmpson's drug store, but Gardnel
failed to appear. At 2 B. m. the witness
and Crossman met Gardner on the cornej
of First avenue s and Third street.
Edwards testified some time on that day
Gardner stated that he would try to get
the 'old man. to consent to accept 5000
Later in the day in the waitifg-room Of
! DR.. Ames' Third street office; the wit
ness and Crossman met Gardner. Edwards
said the latter then and there agreed te
accent 5000 and this sum Of money was
paid over to Gardner. by Crossman -
The attorneys for the defense objected
strenuously to this evidence as not beine
germane to,the Indictment which charges