The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-06-16
THEY ARGUE FOR AND
AGAINST FRED W.
kMES
Appeal of Former Chief of Min
neapOIis Police Is Heard by
the Supreme Court = SEN
tenCe of Six Years and a Half
Hangs Over His Head.

Fred W. Ames' appeal to the SUI
preme court for new trial on the
ground of error was argued yesterday
before that tribunal
The former chief of police Of Min
neapolis sat in the courtroom behind
his attorney, Victor J. Welch, through
out the entire hearing, but held no con-
VerSation with the attorney in the
course of the proceedings nor showed
any other evidence of deep concern or
nervousness as to the outcome. The
argument on the part of the state was
presented by F. H. Boardman, county
attorney of Hennepin.
In questions asked and comments
dropped from time to time by members
of the bench there was evidenced
disposition on the part of the court to
restrain Mr.. Boardman in the broad
scope of his argument
Mr.. Welch, counsel for Col. AmeS,
passed very lightly over the allegation
that the state had failed to prove the
defendant guilty, but laid much stress
upon the contention that the state had
exceeded the evidence which should be
permissible under the indictment
charging Ames with having accepted
a bride of SIS from Addie Mills for
protection.
Says Grand Jury Was Prejudiced.
He argued that the trial court was in
error in not quashing the indictment,
as the grand jury is subject to chal-
lenge just as much after an indictment
Is found as before. The defense, he
said. had offered affidavits to prove
prejudice on the part of the grand jury,
but the court had refused to admit
them.
One of the affidavits, he stated, would
show that a member of the grand jury
had said that if Ames was acquitted
!, !
mentS until he was convicted. Another
affidavit was to show that Hovey
Clarke, foreman. and other members
of the grand jury has raised 81 200 to
get evidence against the defendant.
Mr.. Welch argued that these acts,
which he offered to show by the affi-
dayits, would have proved a preju dice
upon which the indictment should
have been quashed.
Mr.. WEIGH argued that the trial
court should not have admitted evil
dence as TO any other payment than
that Of Addie Mills, upon which the
indictment was based. The testimony
as TO other payments to the man Co.
hen was reviewed to show that they
constituted separate and distinct Of
lenses.
Cites Molineux Case.
Mr.. WEIGH invoked the Molineux
case, IN Which new trial was granted
on error in admitting testimony as to
another murder
Mr.. Boardman, in replying to the argu-
ment Of Mr.. WEIGH, said that too narrow
view had been taken of the F'itchette
case and that the present case was en-
1lre1y within the rule laid down in the
tltcneTte decision. The AnneS case was
covered by more. than one of the five ex-
ceptlonS made in the decision 4
AT this Juncture Justice Lovely remark
ed; Courts do not reverse cases for
the reason that the state has proved too
much. The question is whether the other
testimony mad enough relation to the Of
laid down.
Mr.. Boardman replied that such was
the case, and he proceeded to review the
.eVldence IN support of his statement
Cohen, he said, had book containing
the names of the different women and he
led the way. The first visit of the chief
10 the places, he said, showed the motive
TO organize system of graft collection
The testimony showed the connected
scheme.
Mr.. BOardman launched upon a recital
or the indictment and fight of DR. Ames.
put as soon as his purpose became clear
he was Interrupted by Justice Brown.
who inquired what bearing that could
nave upon the present case. Chief JUS
tIce Start expressed himself in the re
mark:
Every tub should stand upon its own
potion. There has already been o11ite
enough Of outside matters introduced into
these cases. All that is before this court
Is the record In this case"
he case was taken under adyisement
ana decision is expected this week