The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-05-06

handcuffed
Senator Borah represented the state
and Messrs. Richardson and Darrow
the prisoner.
Mr.. Richardson opened the argument
for the motion in the prisoners be-
half.
Mr.. Richardson opened his argu-
ment by reading the indictment of
and Simpkins, charged with the muir
der of Governor Steunenberg.
Before the opening of court for the
nearing of the motion for bill of par
uculars, Clarence barrow of counsel
for the defense, said the correspon-
dent of the Associated Press:
Under the laws and constitution.
Meyer, Haywood and Pettibone are to
be tried in court by jury of their
peers.
THE forum is the state court of Ida
no. Under these facts I do not see
what there is for the president to do.
All we have right or desire, to ask
either of him or any other citizen is to
leave the courts and juries to admins
ter the law fairly and without preju-
dice and without influence from the
outside
The motion for the bill of particu-
lars recites the absence of the defend
ants from Idaho at the time the crime
was committed and that the indict-
ment contains no information that
would show the facts which the state
cused- When coCrseIV had finished read
ing the motion Judge Wood Interrupted
to say: as 4',
You know Mr.. Richardson that our
state has no statute providing for a
bill of particulars in such cases.
Il know that such is the case" re-
piled Mr.. Richardson, land I also know
that the supreme court of Idaho has
had It's attention directed to the sub
ject but once. Such a motion, however,
as your honor has heard always di-
reefs itself to the sound discretion of
the court
Mr.. Richardson again drew attention
to the absence Of Haywood from the
state at the time of the murder and
argued that he was entitled to the in
formal ton sought by the motion. He
quoted and explained a number of
authorities in support of his conten-
ton that under general rules of law
the defendants are entitled to have
particulars when indictments do not
clearly set them forth. the defendants
being out Of the state at the time Of
the crime, the prosecution must have
evidence to connect them by conspiracy
or otherwise with the actual killing
This evidence the defendants were en-
titled to have in order that they might
prepare to meet it.
Mr.. Richards declared that the in
dictment did not charge either a spec
ific conspiracy or a general conspiracy
and did not show whether it was AL
to murder only Governor Steunenberg
or to murder number of persons. The
accused, lie said, was therefore left in
the dark by the indictment.
The list of precedents and authori-
ties quoted scores of cases, including
the famous cases of Tilton versus
Beecher, the people of New York
against Tweed and the Chicago an
archist cases.
Mr.. Richardson reviewed the idaho
precedent and commended as to the
time of making the motion that 1t was
proper at any day before the trial. The
court asked if the case had not been
ready for trial about a year. Mr..
Richardson replied that nearly a year
ago the defense had demanded trial.
Mr.. Richardson. after pause. con-
tinued, saying that Haywood had just
drawn his attention to the fact that
last year the defense had been per-
emptorily refused permission to file
any pleading because of the appeal to
the supreme court of the United States
pending.
Mr.. Richardson contended that the
indictments only showed that Cover
nor Steunenberg had been Killed by a
bomb, that Haywood was charged with
conspiring to have Steunenberg muir
dered, and that Haywood was charged
with being present and actually com
hitting the crime, an assertion that
every one knew to be untrue.
Mr.. Haywood" said the attorney,
knows all that he did at all times, but
he does not know what witnesses may
come here and testify. He is entitled to
know the overt act charged against him.
The indictment gave the prisoner abSo-
lutely no information as to the nature
of the charge against him."
Mr.. Richardson concluded at 1875
o'clock.
Senator Borah who began at once for
the state, said that the defense was not
seeking a EXPERIMENTATION of the in
dictment but possession of evidence by
which the state hoped to prove it's case.
He then explained the charge that Hay
wood was at Caldwell, when the murder
was committed was necessary under
the Idaho statutes. He drew attention
to the fact that here was no provision
in the Idaho statutes for granting bills
of particulars. Senator Borah said that
the Indictment as to murder was surely
specific enough to show the prisoner the
exact nature of the charge he must
meet. The demand for particulars as to
the conspiracy was a demand for evil
dence.
Senator Borah further said that Meth
err the statutes of Idaho nor the decis-
ions of the courts anywhere provided
that the defendants in a case of this
character were entitled to the details of
the evidence against them.
Senator Borah concluded his argu-
shortly after II o'clock.
Clarence Darrow followed Senator
Borah with the closing arguments in
support of the motion.
D0DEM0E RIEVc H0kEE