Arizona republican. [volume] (Phoenix, Ariz.) 1890-1930, 1903-04-11
MILTON BRAWLEY CONVICTED
Found Guilty of Perjury at Nine
O'clock Last Night,

Milton Brawley was convicted OF per-,
jury last night in his testimony in the
Hammond case At the last term of the
United States court. The case had
been in the hands of the jury since
the middle OF the afternoon and when
no verdict had been returned at 6
o'clock, it was the opinion of the gov
eminent officials as well as that of the
defense that there would be no agree
ment. 1t WAS expected that a new trial
would be ordered today. In the event
of his acquittaI he would nave only
been half out of the woods for there
was Il second indictment and he would
have been prosecuted on that 1t way
o'clock before the jury sent out word
that it had reached a verdict. Sentence
will probably be passed today.
The trial of the case occupied pretty
nearly all the day as it had taken up
the day before. When the court was
opened in the morning the government
had only one witness TO put on the
stand, Colonel o. c. Sharp, who could
not be found the day before. There
was some little preliminary business
to be transacted by the court with Col
onel Sharp. He was held to be guilty
OF contempt in having failed to appear.
1t was brought out then that the col
onel had been waiting to be told that he
was wanted as u witness. 1t was also
brought out, what most OF the lawyers
did not know, that the law regarding
witnesses in cases before the L. S.
court is different from the law in terri
torial cases. Colonel Sharp had been
witness in the Brawley case before
the grand jury, having been regularly
4,
poenaed again when the case came to
trial. It happens though that accord
ing to the United States law that q
witness before a grand jury is expected
to put in an appearance every day I'M
til he is finally excused.
The court had been put to a great
deal of Inconvenience by the failure of
the witness to appear but on the colon
els statement of his misunderst landing
of his duties he was dismissed on the
payment of the costs of the attach
ment proceedings.
1t was upon the testimony of this
witness that the government was
mainly relying to prove the guilty in
tent Of the defendant. II was to him that
| the defendant had told that the story
he told to Assistant United States At
torney Campbell was different from the
one he was going to tell on the stand
and he wanted to know what could be
done with him for it.
| There was very little testimony for
the defense, reliance being placed or
the theory that the defendant in his
conference with Mr.. Campbell misun-
derstood him and spoke of the presence
Of Hammond at the room of Mrs. Cory
as something he had heard while as g
matter of fact he did not know Ham
mond when he saw him.
The instructions of the court were
strong on the necessity of proper pun
ishment for the crime of perjury. i
was not assumed in the instruction:
that the defendant was guilty but i
was the purpose of the court in the
event of his being found guilty that the
II jury should not labor under a false i'm
preston that trifling offense had beer
| committed.
II The arguments were not long anC
4 the case was given to the jury by tht
middle Of the afternoon.