Shoshone journal. [volume] (Shoshone, Idaho) 1884-1931, 1906-10-26


a, not represent the wish Of any one ma
y, In either branch of congress. II doe
sc not represent exactly the wish of III
ID executive of the nation. Personally
d, believe IL is better because It does no
e represent the exact wish of auv on
d man, because whatever IL may be II rem
# resents the combined judgment OF III
IS two houses of congress and Preside,
5. Roosevelt. If Il is imperfect IL win b
: corrected and. sirs. the Republican par
n tp stands before you committed 70 tn
r idea, not OF government ownership. bu
p or government control OF all monopolie
o that have outgrown the bounds OF com
: petition.
5 Government control. not government
D ownership, is the proper solution Of
these problems, that the masses Of III,
; people and not the few. may receive tbs
] benefits of the inventive genius of man.
I kind that combined wealth is giving 70
/ the great American people at the dawn
OF the twentieth century.
steunenberg Case.
There is another question to which
i would allude. Not because II ougbt
10 be discussed, for it ought not TO but
subject that 1t is necessary to refer
10 because a few-not many-but a few
OF the opponents OF the present state
administration have circulated false
statements and these false statements
should be answered. 1t IS for this rsa-
son that / wish TO refer to what Is
known as the Steunenberg matter.
A man whom you twice elected to be
governor OF the state of Idaho was muir
dered as he returned at eventide to the
bosom OF his family. / do not need to
tell you II was an atrocious crime. for
you have said so in your hearts time
ana time again. I do not need to say
that the person or persons who commit
ted the crime should be punished to the
fun extent of the law, for you have
thought the same thought many times.
1t has been said by certain men that the
ones accused of this crime were kid
mapped from another state and brought
into Idaho for trial 1t has also been
said that the trial of these men HIS
been delayed for political purposes by
the present state administration. Nav
say that If this is true st would be
so grave charge that st should send
the administration. or any party that
N.
to such oblivion from which they could
never more arise. But these statements
are false and the people know they are
false.
When your sheriff or your police ar
rest man It does not mean that the
man is guilty He may be as innocent
OF wrongdoing as are you. It simply
means that the evidence at the time
points to the man arrested. And when
the evidence so points to a man It be-
comes the duty of the man entrusted
with the enforcement Of the law to cause
the arrest of the one to whom the evil
dence seems TO point, that he may be
held for trial
The evidence in the Steunenberg case
pointed TO certain men as probably
guilty and it was the duty of those in
trusted with the enforcement of the law
to apprehend these men. Their arrest
does not mean that they are guilty; it
simply means that they should answer
a jury Of their peers the evidence which
them to be detained These men
could be brought from the state in which
they were either by being kidnapped or
by due process of law By the latter
process ii would be necessary for the
governor Of Idaho TO ask that they be
delivered over 10 the state from the
governor of Colorado. The governor OF
Idaho realized full well the responsible
lily that such a request entailed. He
studied well the evidence and then he
signed the request upon the governor OF
Colorado asking that the men, Meyer.
Haywood and Pertibone. be extradited.
The governor of Colorado likewise was
impressed with the responsibility that
would follow his signing the requisition
papers. In so doing he did not act
hastily; for nearly two days he studied
over the evidence which seemed to point
20 these men. and at the expiration OF
hat time he signed the extradition pa
oers and the men were brought to Idaho
o answer as to their guilt.
And. sirs, the trial of these men has
lot been delayed for political purposes.
IS has been charged. In fact. the state
las not delayed their trial at all. II
s the duty Of the attorneys for the de-
'ense to try by every honorable means
o acquit their clients. If you were ac-
used of crime. whether you were limo
ent or guilty. that is what you would
emand of your attorneys. In the de-
ense then. of these men. their attorneys
sked that they be released under that
Id writ. which is guaranteed by state
nd federal constitution. the writ OF
abeas corpus Their release under this
writ was denied by the Supreme court OF
daho and an appeal was taken to the
supreme court of the United States.
'heire release upon this writ was also
enied by the Federal court for Idaho
nd again an appeal was taken 10 the
supreme court of the United States.
his second appeal has not yet been
card. nor can IL be heard until the Su-
RENE court of the United States shall
gain assemble. 1t viii assemble upon
ext Monday and hope not many days
hay pass by until that supreme tribunal
nay pass upon the merits of the case
5 il has been appealed to them. The
tate is ready for trial. but until the
ecision shall have been given by the
upreme court upon the case as 1t now
tands appealed to their honorable body.
he state cannot proceed. Whose fault.
hen, is the delay? Clearly it is not
be states fault nor shall I say IL is
he fault of the defense. Rather IL is
heir right and more than their right,
is their duty It is the duty OF the