The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-05-30
How the st. Louis Detective Was
Drawn Into His own Net and
Meshed Hand and Foot.
HILTON o. BROWN ON THE STAND
NEWS MANAGER RELATES HIS PART
IN SCHEME TO ENTRAP LOGsDON.
~. C. Day Testiies that DIR. Hunt Was
Banks Case Bulwark Of Defense.

The fate of Arthur Stahl. the st. Louis
detective laid by the heel in an attempt to
brioe. at the instigation of others, Edwin
d. Logsdon, of the Board of Public Works,
depends upon the ability OF the defense to
show that the law will protect men who
use the means alleged in an effort to detect
crime Broadly stated that Is Stahl's de-
tense. elaborately presented by Attorneys
John s. Duncan and Charles W. Smith, and
attacked by Henry Spaan for the prosecu-
ton.
Just how far men may go in the way OF
uncovering alleged corruption was the
basis of the intensely interesting argument
at the resumption OF Stahl's trial yesterday
afternoon before Judge Whallon. For the
defense Attorney Duncan contended that
DIR. George E. Hunt, of the Citizens
League. Hilton u. Brown, of the Indian
apolis News, James w. Noel prosecutor Of
Logsdon before the Council committee. and
Detective Stahl had information that crime
was being protected in Indianapolis, and
that they had a right to induce Logsdon to
commit another crime for the purpose of
convicting him. For the prosecution At
torney Spaan declared that by their own
admissions the men under fire had been
unable to obtain any discriminating evil
dence against Logsdon. and yet they
plotted to steal his honor. Agreeing that
the courts recognize the use of detectives
in ferreting out wrongdoing on the part of
public officials. Mr. Spaan pointed out that
II Is necessary TO show that the man
against whom a plot is directed must have
committed previously crime similar in
nature to the one contemplated by the plot
STALLS DAILY REPORTS.
The argument was heated. To justify
the motives OF the alleged conspirators
Attorney Duncan produced daily reports
made by Detective Stahl to DR.. Hunt and
Mr.. Noel. Spaan fought the admission of
the reports inch by inch and succeeded In
having the court rule that only such parts
of the report as apply to Stahls conversa-
tions with Logsdon is competent evidence.
One by one Duncan produced the reports
and n-nded them to Spaan. One by one
Sraan scrutinized them. ran his pencil
through Objectionable paragraphs and
passed them to Judge whallon.
The argument and the introduction Of
reports came with the conclusion of the
testimony of DIR. George z. Hunt, who
was the last witness Thursday afternoon.
The other witnesses yesterday were Hilton
u. Brown, of the News, and Thomas C.
Day. OF the Citizens League. Spaan took
DR.. Hunt in hand at once.
did you expect Logsdon to accept a
bribe?' he asked.
Il did not expect a bribe to be offered"
replied DIR. Hunt.
Did you take counsel as to the meaning
of the law covering attempts to bribe?'
Spaan continued. DR.. Hunt answered that
Noel had been consulted and had given
opinion to the proposed action. Noel
said they could go ahead with the scheme
contemplated and Logsdon would commit
no crime.
What did he say about you committing
a crime?"
'I can't recall exactly. I think he said we
would not commit a crime. We did not
think Logsdon would be committing crime
even IL he should fall in with the idea"
Ibid Noel tell you that he believed
Logsdon an honest man and that he had
no evidence against him?"
YES" replied DR.. Hunt. He did"
NO GUILT ON LOGSDON'S PART.
$50 you and Noel and Brown entered on
this scheme. believing there was no guilt
on Logsdon's shoulders; that he was
straight and you could not convict him?'
DR.. Hunt replied slowly. "Yes, SIR"
OF $500. would you have considered him
guilty?' asked Spann.
NO" said Hunt.
'And yet evidence was what you were
after. was it not?"
"You were afraid of a damage suit. were
mo. We thought Logsdon was a polit-
ical boss whom the people would not stand
get a hold on him through the public
press?
DR.. Hunt replied that this was not the
object. "All right" said Spaan, 1.-The bur-
den Is en- your own conscience not mine"
You expected 10 escape under the Banks
case didn't you?" Here Attorney Duncan
manded TO know by what right Duncan in
terposed an objection. You say you don't
repRresssn,s. !zRr s,s these eonspirators," he said.
can Whom do You represent them de-
manded spaan: None Of your business
TO oppose the admission OF all testimony that
Is not competent.
81 will tell you how the land lies," ex-
claimed Spaan. You have matters TO hide
that's what's the matter with Won
THE court Will find before we get through
that You have more TO hide than we have"
'Well we want TO know whom we are
hghting. said Spaan. ''and behind whom
they are IN hiding; p II Is evident you are going
court sustained Duncan and Spaan began
TO questo Hurt on another tack He asked
Hunt IL Duncan Is his attorney. Duncan
objected. then withdrew his objection and
the doctor said mo"
"Did you expect Logsdon to accent the
bribe OF 81 .500?' Spaen went on.
IT don't like that word bribe," said DIR.
Hunt.
We'll. out of respect to your feeling"
replied Spaan, IT will say Offer
"I don't know said Hunt. 'I didn't
(coNTINuED ON PAGE q. COL. l.