The Billings gazette. [volume] (Billings, Mont.) 1896-1919, 1904-01-19
ONE GUILTY
ANOTHER NOT
EVEN BREAK IN CRIMINAL
TRIALS THUS FAR.
SIX YEARS FOR H0RSETHiEF
Frank PurI Is sequestered That
Length Of Time-Lathrom Ac-
! quilted Of Forgery.

When Judge Loud convened the dis
/ trict Ocurt yesterday morning it was
| to begin the trial of Joseph Francis
Lathrom, charged with the crime OF
forgery. The following were sworn
as jurors:
George H. Smith, R. B. Platt, Char.
! les Spear, George Lacey, Frank l.
Condaux, Andy Fulton, T. c. Armitage
Henry Haid, Neill Flatt, H. C. Hen
Erickson, e. G. Summers, w. j. You
! mans.
In the complaint against Lathrom
it is alleged that August 6, 1903, he
feloniously passed forged check on
Edward Lightfoot of Laurel, purport-
ing to have been issued by A. L.
Thomas on the First National bank
of Billings for the sum of $45.
After the commission of the alleg-
ed forgery Lathrom left the state and
several months afterward was arrest
ed in Missouri, to which state he
went, via freight trains. 1t is known
that his wife met him in this city the
day he was last seen and that he ac-
companied her as far as Huntley,
where for the time being all trace
of him was lost. He supplied Mrs.
Lathrom with ticket to their home,
it is claimed, and then followed her,
stealing rides on trains as he could.
He was finally located and Sheriff
Hubbard went after him and brought
him back.
At the last term of court Lathrom
was arraigned for trial and jury
was empaneled. After the states first
witness had been examined the case
came to an abrupt end. 1t developed
that the date given in the informa-
ton was not the one the witnesses
were prepared to testify that the
check was passed. AS the defense
proposed to be made was an alibi,
Lathrom's attorney, Lou Chapple,
asked for continuance in order to
enable him to secure the attendance
of witnesses material for the defense.
The motion was e! anted and Lathrom
Was remanded. He remained in Jail
':n,il a cn,p'e of weeks ago. when
he was released ON bonds.
Misplaced Confidence.
In trying to make as strong case
as possible for his client, Attorney
Chapple caused Arthur Smith, a con-
vict serving sentence at Deer Lodge,
to be subpoenaed for the defense.
The result was disappointment to
the faithful lawyer and an unneces-
sary expense to the county.
Mr. Chapple had been informed by
Lathrom that during the night Smith,
who was sentenced from Carbon coun-
ty, was held in the Jail here with him
he had made statement to him which
in effect was an admission that he,
Smith, was the man who had passed
the check. Considering this material
and having sufficient confidence in|
human nature to trust even a convict
to the extent of being willing to clear
an innocent man, when by doing so
he virtually incriminated himself, Mr..
Chapple had a subpoena issued for
Smith and he was brought back from
Deer Lodge last Saturday. Yesterday
afternoon he was put on the stand.
Smith made prompt answer to the
first question, which was an inquiry
as to his name and place of residence.
Smith replied that he was convict
in the state penitentiary and that
while being taken to prison had spent
one night in the city jail here. The
second inquiry was productive of the
and disappointment to Mr..
Chapple. Smith said that he had
heard of the forgery and also that
Lathrom was accused of it, but that
was as far as his knowledge extended.
He was then asked if he had not
in the presence of several other pris-
oners said to Lathrom that he, Smith,
could clear him of the charge if he
but guessed he would not do
it then. Smith denied having made
any such statement or anything of |,
that nature. Other questions were
asked with view to bringing out the