Omaha daily bee., 1905-06-24
! EVIDENCE AGAINST MITCHELL
Law Partner Produces Many Papers Con-
Meeting Senator with Land Gases.
Fight AGAINST THEIR ADMISSION
20 s4~,Iru,r,
Court HoIds me. oper
in showing that Onense Was ,St
Committed Through an
oversight.

PORTLAND. Ore, June 23.-Formcr
Judge Albert II. Turner, chief witness for
the prosecution in the case of the United
States against Senator Mitchell occupied
the witness stand all day today. The di-
rect examination was concluded late this
afternoon, after which court was adjourned
until tomorrow, when the defense Will De-
gin its crosse examination.
only once today did anything occur to
break the uonotonous piling up Of docu-
mentary evidence by the prosecution. This
was when the court ruled that 1t was
proper to introduce evidence tending TO
show that Senator Mitchell had knowingly
accepted fees in other but similar cases,
for the purpose Of proving a lack of prop
ability that an acceptance Of fee in the
case at issue had been an inadvertence or
carelessness. The disagreement arose over
the offer Of a letter and testimony from
Judge Tanner showing that Tanner and
Mitchell had made an agreement with Kri5s
TO expedite certain claims IN December,
1903. The defense objected on the grounds
that the agreement came outside Of those
alleged in the indictment If such evidence
were admitted, the defense argues, II would
| force Senator Mitchell without notice to
disprove allegations not set forth in the in
dictment on which he was being tried; In
other words. be trying him for misdemeanor
J Of which he is not accused.
Prosecution wins Point.
! Mr. Heney contended that the rules OF
! evidence admitted such testimony in GER
! tain cases as tending 70 prove knowledge
| and intent where its lack was set out as a
| defense. as in this case. One offense, con-
tinued Mr.. Heney might perhaps be ar
! accident or an inadvertance. but with
! the increase of similar offenses, said the
district attorney, the probability of lacl
| of knowledge decreased. The court held
! with Mr.. Heney and as a result the testi
mony of Mr. Tanner was admitted in re-
lation to the work done for Benson q Hyde
of California, w. Z. Burke of eastern
Oregon and Lee Sue, a Portland Chinese
| as well other transactions before the
Department Of Commerce and Labor, il
all of which, it was contended, Mr. Mitchell
had received his share Of the fees paid
The introduction and Identification by Mr.
| Tanner of documentary evidence continued
throughout the entire day.
Strong Documentary Evidence.
Letter after letter and telegram afte
telegram which had passed between Sena
tor Mitchell and Mr.. Tanner were offere'
in evidence, despite the efforts of the de
| tense TO stem the HOOu. All, dCCOTNlnB L
the government, re ating to transaction
alleged to have been carried on in part b.
Senator Mitchell in Washington mainly be
fore the general land Office in relation I
the Kribs claims. They comprised instruc
tions and suggestions sent by Mr.. Tanner
lists of lands, references to the fees to b
received and deposit slips sent by Tanne
to Mitchell In some of the letters tn
senator asked if his name had been use
in filing papers. warning Mr.. Tanner tina
he could not appear an attorney befor
any of the government departments Tar
ner referred to the latter, stating that
had not allowed the senator's name to
placed to any of the papers. a letter frOl
Tanner to his partner told Of a converse
! tion had with Benson, who was then
Portland, in which he had cautioned Benso
that the senator could not be known
, any of the transactions. At 4:30 the SUI
ply of documents came to an end an
Mr.. Heney announced that the governmeI
had finished with the witness.
After court had adjourned Mr.. Hene
said that he expected the government wou
complete its case late Monday afternoon.