The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1904-02-05
JUDGE CARY SUSTAINED
George KIugherz Cannot Be Tried on
the Second indictment.
Supreme Court Holds That He Was
in Former Jeopardy.
Defendant Will Regain His Liberty
in a Gay or Two.
Brief Outline CT the Point Involved in
the Decision.
From Fridays Daily.

sANhA - AAN~J -
The supreme court this morning hand
ed down decision affirming the ruling
of Judge Cray in the case of George
Klughertz. This will result in giving
Mr.. Klugherts his freedom. Word of the
decision was received by ]. w. Schmitt
from his brother, H. L. Schmitt, who is
in st. Paul, assisting in the trial of a
case.
1t will be remembered that Mr.. Klug
hertz was tried at the November term
of the district court on the charge of
passing a forged mortgage on the Man
kato Savings bank and in this man
ner defrauding the bank out of $1,000
in cash. 1t was charged that the de
PENDANT represented himself to be a
farmer named Frank L. Hinniker. The
jury brought i'll a verdict of acquittal,
largely, it is said, upon the evidence
given by Thomas and Evan Hughes, that
man of similar appearance to Klug-
hertz, but not he, called at their office
several times at about the time that the
bank was victimized and represented
that he was the rightful heir to a for
tune in Kansas City. Later, they had
found that the man was not the right
full heir, but was trying to get the prop
erty by claiming that he was the right
full heir. The presumption was left on
the minds of the jurors that this man
defrauded the bank.
As soon as the trial was over, the
Messrs. Hughes made closer investiga
tion of the appearance and speech of
the defendant and assured themselves,
so they stated to the court and the coun-
ty attorney, that they had made mis-
take in their testimony and that the de-
PENDANT was the party who had called
at their office in connection with the
Kansas City matter. On the strength of
this and additional evidence that had not
previously been known of, the county
attorney proceeded to arrange for the trial
of Klughertz on second Indictment that
the grand jury had found against him,
charging him with the forgery of the
mortgage. The two indictments were
based on the same transaction, and the
attorneys for the defendant, Pau &
Pau, took the stand that as he had been
tried on one of the indictments he had
been in jeopardy and could not be tried
on the other Indictment. Judge Cray
looked at the matter in the same light,
and the supreme court sustains him.
Pfau & Pau state that they would
have had as strong case at a second
trial as they did at the first one, even
without the testimony of the Messrs.
Hughes, as they had two witnesses who
would have testified that at about the
time of the bank transaction they saw
a man on the streets who very closely
reSemDleQ Jne deIenuaHC Out was HoI
he. They would have also been pre-
pared to explain the additional facts
which the state was prepared to bring
out
As soon as the return is received from
the supreme court, the second indictment
will be dismissed and Klughertz will be
discharged from custody. This will prob
ably be tomorrow or Monday. His
friends are much pleased at the out
come.
The point raised has been decided
in different ways in different states, but
has never before come before the Min