The Minneapolis journal., 1903-12-24
LAST BATTLE
FOR DR.. AMES
APPEAL ARGUED BY HIS .ATToR-
NEYS IN NsUPRENIE COURT.
They Attempt to Break Down the
Testimony of Gardner County At
torney Boartlman Declares that
Gardner Was Abundantly Corrob-
Grated.

- eS>>->'' -s'N~-->-.>--SS-S ~
Grated.
The supreme court this morning lis
tened to arguments in the case of the
state against DR.. A. A. Ames, appealed
from district court of Hennepin
county. where the former mayor Of
in connection with the collection of
graft from protected dissolute
women.
Frank M. Nye and Harry S. Mead
appeared for DR.. Ames and County
Attorney f. H. Boardman represented
the state.
Mr.. Nye confined himself almost
wholly toya discussion OF the technical
point involved in the omnibus indict-
ment upon which DR.. Ames was con-
victed. He attacked the validity of
this Indictment, upon the supposed
weakness Of which arguments for
new trial We're made in Hennepin
county and the, case was eventually
appealed.
Gardner's Credibility.
Mr.. Mead attacked the states case
from another standpoint, devoting his
argument to two principal subjects.
He maintained that Irwin A. Gardner,
the principal witness for the state, had
not been corroborated in his testi-
mony, and took, up facts in his life:
tending to impeach his credibility. Mr..
Mead told how Gardner had been con-
victed for running a disorderly house
at Minnehaha Falls, and for selling
liquor without license.
The attorney also maintained that
great pressure had been brought to
bear on Gardner, both legally and il"
legally to make him testify in the
way the state wished him to; that the
story he told on the stand was true in
so far as it related to taking money
from unfortunate women, but that
Gardner and Coffee John" Fitchette
had had a conference during DR..
Ames' absence at louisville and in
New Hampshire and as a result of
this conference Gardner decided to
throw down the 'old man" in favor
Of "Coffee john who had helped to
plan the graft scheme.
Law of Confederation.
Mr. Mead then took up the law on
bribery, with relation to corrobora-t
ton of accomplices, and attempted to
show the court that the corroboration
should not run to the fact that the
crime had been committed, but to the
fact of the defendants connection
with the crime.
The one bit of states testimony
which connected Mayor Ames with
the crime of bribery was that testified
to by Thomas Brown, former secre-
tary to Mayor Anes, that he had seen
Gardner pay a sum of money to Mayor
Ames in the latter's office in Decem-
ber, 1901, while the mayor was sign
ing council resolutions or warrants.
: Browns Testimony Attacked.
Mr. Mead attempted to impeach this
testimony by showing that no council
meeting in December Of that year was
held after Dec. 20, the day the doctor
went to his home at the beginning of
six weeks illness. He also. sought to
show that Gardner often turned over
to Ames- money collected legitimately,
as both Arnes and Gardner testified,
and that this was probably one of the
occasions.
Mr.. Mead contended that no evidence
introduced by the state from either
Gardner, .Krumweide, or the women of
the town went to show anything like
an agreement between Gardner and
Ames, but did show that the money
Gardner got from the women of the
town was secured by extortion.
There was no evidence of con-
tract between Gardner and Ames,
either in the direct or the circumstan-
tial evidence. If it had been a case Of
bribery no star would have been neces-
sary. -
All these things, Mr.. Mead main
tained pointed not bribery, for which
DR.. Ames was convicted, but to ex-
tortion, of which Gardner, alone, was
guilty.
Boardman Reviews Evidence.
County Attorney Boardman spent
very little time on the question Of
| the indictment. He merely outlined
! the argument contained in the printed
irbrief on that point. He reviewed the
evidence at length to justify the YER
Dict dwelling on the significant points
and the members of the. court listened
with the closest attention. He related
! the story of the witnesses who cor
roborated Gardner's story, to show
! that Gardner, was acting under au-
| thority of the mayor in all his graft
/ Operations. The testimony Of Captain
Sinclair and the other officers who
| were directed at headquarters to go
to DR.. Ames' office and take their
orders from Gardner, was cited, and
Mr.. Boardman also dwelt on the case
! of Ray Harris. who was arrested by
Krumweide, but released after the
mayor himself gave Gardner the
money to pay her fine, and allowed
to resume her operations because she
! had been paying tribute.
! Mr.. Boardman said that under the
decision in the Fred $Ames case the
state would have been justified in
! bringing in a long chain of evidence,
but he believed the transactions for
the month offDecember proved their
case, and so stuck to that month.
!" A decision is looked for in about
! three weeks.