Los Angeles herald., 1907-06-22
MOTION TO
ACQU|T is
OvERRULED
State Rests Case in
Haywood Trial
at Boise
Court Adjourns Until
Monday Morning
at 10 O'clock
Richardson and Darrow Make Dra-
matte Addresses-Defense VIII
Begin When Court Con-
am venes Next Monday
BY Associated Press.

BY Associated Press.
BOISE, Ida, June 21.-When the state
today closed its case against William D.
Haywood, charged with the murder OF
Frank Steunenberg the defense made an
unsuccessful attempt to secure from the
court an order directing the jury to
acquit the prisoner. Judge Woods ruling
which requires the defense to meet with
evidence the case that the state has pre-
sented was made at 5:15 o'clock, and it
was then arranged that Haywood's coun-
sci should make their opening statement
and present their first testimony on Mon
day.
When the trial opened this morning 1t
was stipulated that the record should
show that the date of the draft sent by
Haywood to Jack Simpkins late in 1905
was December 21, and after that the
prosecution proceeded to show by a
handwriting expert that George Petit
bone, using the names of ~. Wolff and
"P Bone" made two remittances of
money to Harry Orchard at San Fran
cisco through the Pacific Postal Tele-
graph company in the fall of 1904. The
state next called Jim Seaborn, colored
horse and buggy to Orchard in Denver
In 1905 and Identified Haywood as one OF
the men who rode with Orchard. After
1903 Haywood sent $75 to Steve Adams at
Ogden, and when the necessary showing
had been made on the record the prose-
cution formally rested.
The motion for an instruction to the
Jury to acquit was by agreement pre-
sented at the afternoon session, and the
jury was sent back to the jury house out
of hearing of the argument.
Richardson Argues
Attorney E. F. Richardson made the
principal argument in support OF the mo,
tion in long, carefully prepared ana
eloquent speech. He TOOK Ior ms guiae
tion upon the uncorrobonated testimony
of an accomplice. and quoted many
authorities in support 9f ms h contention
tion entirely independent OF the testlmony
of the accomplice, and made an analysis
Of all the testimony oHereu; ne ,,d afand
without the support of Orchards story,
and that the statute specifically forbade
its acceptance under those circumstances
the state, argued with like force and elo-
ouence that Haywood's connection had
been Independently, shown and that Or
chard's testimony had been corroborated
by Independent circumstances and evil
derice. He also submitted general ar
gument to show that the state had estao-
lished the existence of general con-
spiracy in which Haywood was a part1cl,
pant and in which he strongly developed
the alleged connection or Pettlpone anu
Clarence Darrow, who closed, pleaded
that there was not a shred or evidence IN
the case capable of standing without the
rotten thread of Orchards story to sus-
tain it and that the plain provision OF
the Idaho statute made the e. duty OF the
general conspiracy, and contended that II
the most liberal allowance were made
for the entire showing OF tne state e9as nSe
prisoner worthy OF submission 10 the
Jury.
Now vigorously denouncing Orchard in
for the state, sneering and sarcastic, and
again destroying the legal aspect OF the
case, Darrow was the picturesque hgure
of the afternoons argument
''The state has promised to connect
ccnnect-connect," he cried, and turning
to Senator borah he sneered, 'connect
with what? The rotten thread of the tes-
timony of Orchard, the traitor, the assas-
sin, the informer and the murderer"
In conclusion he appealed to the court
to withdraw the case from the jury anu
Judge Wood Immediately announced his
decision, refusing the motion.
1.-THE court is thoroughly satisned tnat
this cause should be submitted to the
jury. If 1 felt differently l would not
Tbe court then explained that he would
not review the evidence in written
opinion because there were two more de-
PENDANTS to be tried later. .,a "a.
Mr. Richardson, VINO nau cnanSeu MS
place SO as to face the bench, and stand
ing lust within the railing COMMENCED
his argument at once. Mr. Richardson
opened by reading from the statute or
the state of Idaho. which says that a
Conviction cannot be had on the, testi-
mony of an accomplice, unless itgls cor
roborated by other evidence which by IT
self and without the aid of the testimony
of the accomplice tends to connect the
defendant with the commission OF the
Shows States Failures
He took the testimony of Miss Cora
Peabody as an instance of the failure on
the part of the state to introduce. evi-
dence which Independently of the evidence
of the accomplice was sufficient TO per-
NIT of an inference that the defendant
was connected with the offense charged
He drew attention to the fact that MISS
Peabody merely testified that she had
seen two men near her carriage on GER
tain night. Orchard had said he was
there. but there was, said Mr.. Richardson,
absolutely no Independent corroboration.
The two statements taken together might
create an inference. but Miss Peabody S
evidence was worthless without Orchards s
testimony.
Richardson mentioned other Testimony
for the state as having utterly failed to
connect Haywood with the commission Of
the crime.
Later he quoted from two Idaho cases
where there was reversal because of the
failure of the state tn convict on the
Testimony Of an accomplice.
Taking up the San Francisco matter he
dCOntinued on Page TwO.l