The Washington times., 1905-05-19
keigwin Denies Agree
l11ent to Get States
Evidence.
SEVERANCE ARGUMENT
Government Must Reply to
Crawford Motion in
Writing.

There is nc arrangement or agree
ment between Lorenz and the Govern
snent that ] know OK by which Lorenz
is to turn states evidence" said Assist
ant District Attorney Charles a. keig-
win to Justice Wright today In Crimi
nal Court No. /. in discussing the mo-
ton Of William G. Crawford for a sever
ance and separate trial, In the Craw-
ford d-Maehen-LorenZ postoHice conspira-
cy case set for Monday next.
There was a lively discussion Of the
matter. but no definite action was taken
by the court and the hearing went over
until tomorrow morning.
Mr.. Worthington's Motion.
In the motion filed yesterday by his
counsel. A. s. Worthington. Mr. Craw-
ford stated he had asked the District
Attorney If Lorenz. who was convicted
OF a similar osfense. but who for some
reason has not been sent to the peni-
tertiary, would act with the Government
IN the prosecution OF the case, and had
not been able TO obtain any information
on the subject He further said he be-
neyed such an arrangement had been
entered into between Iorenz and repre-
sentattves OF the Government
When the matter came on for hearing
today Mr.. keigwin and Holmes Con-
rad, special counsel fer the Government
represented Mr.. Crawford
After hearing the motion read by Mr..
Worthington. Justice Wright said II the
are true there was no necessity for ar
gument on the proposition. This state
ment was based On the fact that the
r1.<z
davtt or paper writing eoEtroyerting
the dyerments made.
Major Conrad asked To be heard as to
been entered into between tIse Govern
ment and Lorenz. by which the latter
was to give testimony favorable TO the
prosecution. He said he had no knowI-
edge of any personal feeling or ami
mostly on the part Of Lorenx against
Crawford or Macher. =
Then why Is Lorenz not in the peni-
tentiary?" asked Mr.. Worthington.
Major Conrad explained that soon after
Lorenz's conviction he suffered with
stated 1t would be dangerous to re-
move him TO the penitentiary.
Written Statement Demanded.
Justice Wright at this juncture inter-
rupted the eolloauy between counsel and
said he would not consider any state
ment Of counsel for the Government un-
less 1t was in the form Of an affidavit
or paper writing of some kind To this
Major Conrad replied he did not intend
to go on record in the matter.
Justice Wrtght-Then the affidavit
stands uucontradicted.
Mr. Keigwin then entered into the
discussion and said the affidavit filed by
Mr.. Crawford does not state that any
arrangement exists between Lorenz a1o
representatives OF the Government py
which the former shall act in conjune-
ton witI the latter. but merely deducIs
this from the circumstances set out
The statement that no information was
given the defendant on the subject by
the District Attorney, Mr.. Keigwin con-
tended was not an admission that there
is such an agreement But because ne
was not given any information and foT
other reasons he believes there does
exist such an agreement.
No knowledge of Agreement.
Continuing. Mr.. Keigwin said If such
an agreement exists he has no knowl-
edge Of it.
THAT such an accusation is made
against s. public officer Justice Wright
said, ''Is sufficient to demand contrary
statement in refutation.'
j To this Mr. Keigwin replied that the
attitude of the District Attorneys office
| is the same against Lorenz as against
| the other defendants named in the in
sci for the defense knows that the GOV
! ernment has statements made by Lorenz
| as well as those made by the other de
| PENDANTS These statements he explain
ed can only be used as against the per,
! son making them ard noI. against any
/ of his co-defendants.
| Such Il contention. the ccurt stated
would not be valid ground for grant
| ing q severance.
Mr.. Keigwin Noneommittal.
| Here Mr.. Worthington asked Mr.. Keig
win if the Government had not obtained
admissions or statements from Loreni
/ since his conviction. To tkss Mr.. KeiG
| win replied he was nos prepared te
| answer. and continuing said he admitted
| the facts stated by Mr. Crawford in HI:
| affidavit, but denied that his conclusion
! that an agreement had been entered int
| between. Lorenz and the Government ]:
| correct,
Justice Wright then stated that tt,
! statements made in the affidavit mus
| be accepted as true unless met am
| cCntrnyerted by affidavit. The statemen
| that an agreement has been entered int
| between Lorenz and the Government, h'
| said IS sufficient to warrant the grant
| ing of severance, unless proven TO d
untrue.
| At the suggestion of Mr. Worthingtof
| further hearing on the subject wa
postponed until tomorrow morning. a
that time the question of the conSolidt
tien OF the three indictments agains
Mr.. Crawford will also be acted upon
by the court.