The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1906-09-08
NO UNDERHAND OPERATIONS
Boise Statesman Presents Facts in Case
in Clear, Comprehensive Manner for
Information of 0utsiders--wrong
Impression Abroad.


present status Of the famous Steunen-
berg case and the facts concerning the
alleged "kidnapix' of Meyer, Hay
wood and Pettibone, in the most com.
prehensive light and IL given below;
Communications are constantly being
received which reflect the extent to
which misinformation has been dissem.
mated respecting the case growing cut
of the assassination OF former Governor
Frank Steuenberg. One OF these is In
the form OF printed list of questions
sent by an organization in New York.
1t is apparent that the organization
sending out these questions has been
influenced by desire to learn whether
the charges made against the state are
well founded. Those of our people who
have visited eastern points have found
erroneous impressions prevailing there.
this having been created by the activity
OF the socialists in their effort to STAN
pede public sentiment, particularly that
OF working men, into an attitude of OPP
position to the state.
One of the charges which seems to
have made particular impression on
the eastern mind is that which rep
resents the men were kidnapped from
Colorado. Nothing could be farther from
the truth. When the state had secured
such evidence as made it its duty to
proceed against these men to determine
whether they were guilty of participa.
tion in the murder, requisitions were
made ont in the usual manner and the
Colorado executive, after looking into
the matter, issued his warrants for the
arrest and removal OF the men. The
warrants were served and the men were
brought here. II is claimed their at.
torneys should have been sent for, but
no impartial mind will agree with that
plea. All that could have been done
by their attorneys would have been to
raise technical points and delay the re.
moval. OFFERS sent after Persons in
other states charged with crime do not
constitute themselves the special cham
pions OF the persons whom they are
sent to secure. On the contrary they
usually get their men into the juris
diction OF the demanding state with as
little ceremony as possible. Under these
circumstances no one can legitimately
criticise the officers in this case for not
departing from the rule, since a long
siege Of technical contests in court
would have been invited.
The other point that seems to be
most misunderstood is with respect to
the delay in bringing the men to trial.
1t is persistently charged that the state
has refused to give the accused a spec
dy trial and at the same time has de.
MED them bail. The state il not respon.
sible for the delay. 1t was ready and
anxious to 90 to trial, but, by the
action Of the defense, it became i'm
possible for the state court to pro-
ceed.
When the men were brought here, they
went into the supreme court Of the
state, asking to be released on writs of
habeas corpus. The application was de-
MED and the case was carried to the
supreme court Of the United States. AZ
terward an application was made to the
United States circuit court on exactly
the same grounds for release on habeas
corpus. The application was denied and
that case was taken to the supreme
court Of the United States. Both cases
were set for hearing on October Q. They
will be heard together and decided to-
gether both covering exactly the same
points. Their exact similarity is at
tested by stipulation signed for the
attorneys for the defense providing that
the showing and argument in one shall
stand for the other also.
1t was found by the attorneys fol
the state that statute Of the United
States had been construed by the su-
preme court as a bar to any proceed.
ing by state court in any case in
which habeas corpus proceedings had
been instituted in United States cir
cult court and were pending on appeal
to the tribunal at Washington. 1t is
thought by good many people that the
attorneys for the defense knew that
and took the second appeal for the
purpose of preventing an immediate
trial of the case on its merits or lay
ing the foundation for habeas corpus
later should the state pro-