Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1903-09-28
Arguments In the Trial OF
Richards at Indianola Like
ly to End Today
MAY GO TO JURY THIS EVENING
Defense Causes Much Surprise by Re-
fusine to Place the Defendant on the
stand-PubIic Sentiment Favors a
conviotion-Review of the Lawyers
Arguments.

Special to Times-Republican.
Indianola, Sept. 2S.--The trial of lGx-
Deputy Marshal Richards is rapidly
I drawing to a close and 1t seems proba-
Bile that the case will 80 to the jury not
later than tomorrow noon, possibly a
little sooner. The defense rested its
after the Introduction of the states re-
buttal the defense caused a murme- of
surprise by announcing that it would
offer no further testimony and was
ready for argument to begin. 1t was
generally expected that the defense
would put Richards himself on the
stand n there was considerable dis
appointment among the large thronls of
! spectators when 1t learned the defend
ant would not be placed on the stand
to testify in his own behalf. Arguments
We're Their begun. Mr.. Watson for the
speaking for one hour and was followed
by w. +. Powell for the defense, who
spoke one hour and he in turn was
succeeded by Mccormack for the tate.
Mccormack resumed his argument
when court reconvened this morning.
| The arguments are expected to las. all
of the day and then the court will in
struct the jury. 1t will all depend on
the length of the lawyers pleas wheth-
III the ease will reach the jury today or
tomorrow.
The defense did not attempt the
proving of an aiibi, as expected, unless
il may try To prove such by state tes-
iimony, which ii would be appare ntly
Impossible to do; but has rested its
case pom the previous good character
OF the defendant and upon impelch-
saent of the testimony Of state Witness
es. In this matter the defense has
strong ground. as it has several Wit
nesses who have heard the SulliSans
make assertions which would give the
lie to the statements they have made
upon the stand, and, as the most. of
this ~impeaching testimony is among
that which he state in objectins to
continuance of the trial. agreed to ac-
cept as presented by defense counsel,
there Is no chance for the states at
torneys to question such testimony as
it Is presented by the defense in writ
ing. The defense has further proven
the defendants good reputation rrior
to the time when he was charged with
completely in the Sullivan holduT by
the mayors. of the Iowa towns, by the
chief of police OF one OF them. ane! by
the testimony of such men as E r..
Mason. A. L. Quint, ID. NJ. Bringolf and
s. S. Etheridge. all of Des Moines.
On the other hand the states attor-l
neys are equally we'll pleased. They say
that the remarkable holding together
OF all parts Of the evidence is too COM
plete TO be a made-up story. Public
is strongly inclined toward
conviction.
He then attacked the state witnesses.
.sThe star witness for the state is a
~penitentiary bird, a counterfeiter a
gambler, who was run to ground a few
years ago by this outrageous criminal,
Richards. Is 1t to be wondered at that
Frank Baird feels so friendly towards
MI. Richards that he is willing to tes-
tify against him in this case? Eitherl
Baird is a liar or the Sullivans are
liars, for one a y that Richards was
in the house and the other says he was
not. / lave NJ more time to speak Of
the character of Frank Baird. for he
has no character. We learn that In
Creston he formed the acquaintance
Of a very sweet and amiable grass wild :
ow by the name of Nellie Fuller, that he
lived at her house, INK that the two
of them were run out OF town together.
Also we find that Baird says he had
told his wife of the conference planned
for his house between Mr.. Richards and
himself while Mrs. Baird says she knew
nothing OF 1t until she saw Mr.. Rich
ards there"
Mr.. Mccormack began his argument
shortly after 8 o'clock and was still be-
fore the Jury at the time of evening adj
tournament. He answered sorne OF the
thrusts of Mr.. Powell. Hell
said that he would not deny any OF Gei
charges of the defense against the
character of Baird; but. he could not
understand why they were willing TO
accept all of the statements of laird
relative to his personal history but con-
cluded hi he was a liar as concerned
everything hat had happened after
about 5 o'clock on Thursday, January
/. He also remarked that only one man
had been able to testify to anything
in Mrs. Baird's character since
her last marriage, except one man, and
he admitted that he had gone to Platts-
mouth at the same time with her. Hell
also remarked that although defense
alleged a bad character for Mrs. !sulli-
van, the defendant seemed to have
Chosen her house as a boarding place.
in the town of Hamilton. He said fur
Their that no one had been able to show
that the woman was of bad reputation
now and that the only record against
her vas that she was unfortunate when
a girl thirteen years old.
County Attorney Watson's speech
was largely in review OF the evidence
Baird, and called the attention CT the
to the remarkable confederation
given Baird's testimony by every Wit
ness for the state. Mr.. Watson recalled
in detail the greater part OF such testi-
n,ony. He admitted the bad character
some Of the state witnesses, bu. said
that there were a few facts estab ished
by unimpeachable testimony, which
ought to be sufficient to warrant g. ver-
dict of guilty. He said that the mis-
take of Mrs. Richards in saying 1t was
vet dark when she awakened her
husband at Z o'clock on the first day
of January was almost positive cor
r~oborative of the assertions Of Baird,