Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1907-10-17
CONVICTED BRIBER WINS IN
SUPREME COURT.
JUDGE VINJE MAKES ERROR
Incorrectly Charged the Jury-District
Attorney McGoVern Did Not Com
NIT Anything Preiudiciai to De-
PENDANT, but Is Cautioned on Acr
count of Language Of Witness.
Madison, Oct. l6.


Because Judge A. j. Vinje erred in
instructing the jury in the trial of
Fred C. Schultz, who was convicted OF
the crime of bribery and sentenced.
to the house of correction, the SUI
preme court yesterday ordered the
alleged corruptionist transferred to
the sheriff of Milwaukee county until
his case is called for new trial.
The supreme court holds, in an
opinion written by Justice Winslow,
that the language of the judge in the
charge to the jury was preiudicial
error and that the court also erred
because he refused to charge the jury
as requested by the attorneys for the
defendant. Upon these points alone
the case is reversed and sent back.
for retrial. On the multitudinous
other alleged errors presented by the
defendant, the case Of the state Is
held to be free from error. But OF
the charge of the judge, the supreme
court says: "An instruction better
calculated to convey a wrong idea of
the proper hearing of the evidence or
more prejudicial to the defendant on
this important question could not
easily be framed"
No Error by McGovern.
While the supreme court cautions,
the district attorney mildly, it finds
that he committed an error There
was no error in the manner of the
defendants demurrer, no error in the
oyerruling of the defendants plea 10
abatement or in oVerruling the de-
PENDANTS motion to quash the indict-
ment A prtma facie case of con-
spiracy was shown, declares the court,
connecting Klefsch Seidel and Pulls
They were engaged in common en-
terprise."
Acted in Good Faith.
AS to the conduct of the district at
torney in revising questions and re-
peating them in other form and other
language after substantially the same
questions had been asked and ruled
out on objection of the defendants
counsel, the supreme court held that
there was no error. IF this is done
in good faith" says the court, and
we see no reason to doubt the good
faith here, we think counsel Is within
his right"
The court also sustains the district
attorney in the matter of his remarks
in the summing up and argument be-
fore the jury, remarking that the
court instructed the jury to disregard
certain remarks which seemed to go
beyond the record, and it is held that
the district attorney did not there
fore inject error into the trial. The
supreme court also decided against
the alleged briber on the point OF the
exclusion of evidence offered for the
purpose Of proving the good character
of Klefisch and other co-conspirators,
declaring that the defense had no
right to prove that an associate vas
of good character.
Witness Went too Far.
On the point of the fierce denuncIa-
ton of Schultz by the witness Swartz-
burg, to the effect that the defense
was like the chairman of all the cor
ruption in Milwaukee, and other
equally damaging language, the SUI
preme court holds that while the Ian
guage was rather close to the line OF
error in that 1t charged the defendant
with many other brands of wicked
ness than that contained in the
charge for which he was placed on
trial, and the suggestion is offered by
the court hat in the next trial care
be had to keep well within the
beaten paths of evidence.