Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-02-18
|RCH|LD IS ACCUSED COUNSEL HEARD TODAY
Basset Causes Dramatic Argument of Point of Law IN
Scene in Omaha Court. Hermann Case.
IS HE CAUSED TROUBLE BEFORE JUSTICE STAFFORD
Representative Figures Motion Granted for Additional Bill Of
Divorce Testimony Particulars.
HUSBANDS BEST FRIEND JURY EXCUSED TILL TOMORROW
Mr. HINT R.s;ons From His Testimony
urchWahington Letters WHICH tne VI
nored by Judge Reddick. fered-"itnesses Examined.
Argument of Point of Law IN
Hermann Case.
BEFORE JUSTICE STAFFORD
Motion Granted for Additional Bill Of
Particular.
JURY EXCUSED TILL TOMORROW
Testimony in Identification Of the
Letters Which the Government Of
fered-Witnesses Examined.

fered-W1tneSseS Examined.
| Proceedings today In the trial of
! Binger Hermann, former commissioner Of
the general land ONCE, under indictment
for destroying thirty-five letter press
| copy books Of the records of that ONCE.
| were again Of a preliminary nature, and
| not much interest was attached to what
| transpired in court. Throughout the
| morning session, however. Representative
| Hermann, who sat at some distance from
| the witness-stand, leaned forward in an
attitude of strained attention, with the
| evident desire not to miss word of the
evidence or the statements Of the attor-
| neys of either side.
Because it was evident that probably
| all of the session of Criminal Court
| No. I would be consumed in arguments
| for and against the admission into evil
| dence Of the letters said to have been
written by the defendant, Justice Stat
ford excused the jury until tomorrow
morning at 10 o'clock, and the court inn
mediately proceeded to consideration Of
the legal question of whether the United
States attorney might file an additional
| bill of particulars SO as to bring the let
| tiers in the case formally to the attention
| this afternoon, decided that the add1-
tional bill may be fled The introduction
] of this point of law caused the hearing
| to come to sudden halt last week. and
| the defense today continued it's conten-
| tion that the government. having failed
to specify the letters in it's original bill
| of particulars. should not be permitted
to include them in further bill, the ulti-
mate object being the exclusion of the
| letters from the evidence
| A number of witnesses were put on the
| Icirv y,1x to hn ha iy1l he rJn
| letters reached the district attorneys of
| fee and the entire morning session of the
| court was devoted by the defense to an
| effort to show that the government had
| knowledge of the existence of the letters
| for length of time su1ncient to have been
| enabled to furnish a comprehensive bill
| of particulars to the defense. The court
| this afternoon will listen to the arguments
| of the attorneys for both sides upon the
| question of law involved.
| Files an Affidavit.
| After the jury had been excused this
morning, District Attorney Baker presented
| an affidavit in support Of the affidavit made
| by himself last week, from Irving Ritten-
house. who has been associated with the
| district attorneys Office in the preparation
| of the Hermann case for trial. Mr.. Ritten-
houses affidavit, in effect was that he had
| been unable, except during the past four
| weeks, to give uninterrupted attention to
| the collection of documentary evidence In
| the case.
Attorney Galley, for the defense, read an
answering affidavit. in which number Of
points against the filing of the additional
| bill of particulars were set out
Letters in the Case
| To bring out the time certain letters,
marked as exhibits in the case, were re-
ceived by the government. Attorneys Worth
ington and Galley asked permission to in
| xxyitp ia
ence which is sought to be introduced by
| the prosecution as evidence in the case.
| William M. La Force of Portland Ore,
| was the first witness called. To queries
| propounded by Mr.. Galley. witness said he
! was summoned January %, 1907. to appear
| in Washington February Z. MI. La Force
| also said he had turned over between three
| and eight letters from the files of Peter H.
| Ward, which were in his possession. The
| letter numbered exhibit 80 was shown to
| witness but he could not identify 1T. Dis
/ trict Attorney Baker simpliied matters by
| saying: I'VE admit that this letter was
among those brought to Washington by
Mr. Rittenhouse few days ago.
| DO you know whether Francis J. Heney
| ever saw this letter." asked Attorney
| Worthington.
| He did not" witness answered.
| Clark E. Loomis of Eugene, Greg, tes-
i titled he was summoned February to ap-
| pear in Washington February Z, but he
was stopped en- route by floods so that his
arrival was delayed until February 10.
! LOOMS was questioned about letters num-
bered as exhibits. u, IS. 81, "a. 80. 30. 81,
81, 50, So, S. ST. 80 and 113. Witness said
! he was rather careless about such things
| and he was not positive as to letters other
| than those numbered 81. Y, 81. SIS and So.
I.oomis said all of his letters were In the
| possession of Francis ]. Heney, then United
States district attorney for Oregon, about
| two years ago.
Joseph T. Bridges, formerly in charge of
| the land office at Roseberg, Greg, said
| he was summoned January 20 and arrived
| in Washington February 8. Asked about
| exhibit No. SO, letter written to him
| by the defendant Binger Hermann. Mr..
| Bridges declared he had not seen it since
| the governments special agents had sum-
mariy taken possession or the hosebufs
Office, January 8. 1905.
! W. G. Steele of Portland. Oregon. arrived
| in Washington February and reported to
| the district attorneys office the same day.
He too was shown a series of letters. and
| after examining them he testified all were
| turned over to the government February Z.
Steele further testified the letters had been
| in possession OF the district attorney, Port.
land, Greg. and when summoned he went
| to the district attorneys office and secured
| the letters, demanded in his subpoena, to
| bring them to Washington.
| Further Identification.
| B. F. Allen of Santa Monica, CAL, arrived
| in Washington February 7, and Mr.. Cat
| leys questions brought out the fact that
| witness turned over on February letters
| numbered as exhibits 10, 80, 81 49, As, SO,
| Al, 46 and 4S.
Had the letters ever been out of your
| possession prior to February So asked
| Attorney Galley.
| NO"
| ]. w. Rowland of Portland. Ore, identi-
1 fed letter No. 1S. and testified he gave it
to Assistant District Attorney Adkins Feb
| ruary o.
Testimony along the same line was given
| by B. T. May, Albert H. Tanner and other
witnesses.
| At the request Of the defense, Assistant
| District Attorney Adkins took the witness
| stand, and he was questioned concerning
| the letters Of George c. Brownen Of Oregon
| City, Ore. lIr. Brownell was summoned
| as a witness, but has been unable yet to
| leave his home on account OF illness. Mr..
| Adkins declared some of the Browneli let
| tiers wer brought to Washington in January
| by Mr.. Rttenhouse and some were mailed
| to the district attorneys office, arriving
| probably few days before the trial began.
| Session This Afternoon.
| Al the 0pening Of the afternoon session