Bisbee daily review., 1907-06-22
TICKETS HAD NJ CASE AGAINST
 JOHNSON
After Listening to Testimony of Shields and Cooper Just ice Gier Dismisses Case Against Lowell Offer.

pickets, Lou Shields and G. W. Coop CT. The trial was originally set for D. m., but owing to the fact that Judge R. s. Grier was busy in Judge Hogan's court at Bisbee as a witness in a garnishment proceeding, it was near ?. m. before the trial began.
 After the complaint had been read the defendants attorneys discovered that the prosecution was represented by two additional attorneys not con nected with the District Attorneys office. L. Kearney and w. B. Cleary. After a lengthy objection by Attorney George Neale, for Johnson, it was fin ally decided to call up the District At torney at Tombstone and get his au- thority for Kearney and Cleary to as- sist in the prosecution. After wait of fifteen minutes. the District Attor- ney gave his consent to both Kearney and Cleary appearing with Attorney Strickler These preliminaries over with, the witnesses were called and sworn, when the prosecution discov- cred they were short three of their witnesset, whereas the judge face tiously remarked that they were probably down getting bowl of soup. They were shortly rounded up and brought into court and sworn.
 Lou Shields was the first witness. He stated that he had been a resi- dent of Lowell for one year; that he was 8 member of the Western Feder- ation of Miners, and that he had worked here under three different names. In reply to question as to what occurred on the morning of the
 goth, he stated that he, in company with one c. W. Cooper, went to meet the train at Lowell siding and ride to Bisbee. as had been the GUS
 tom for some time That he was ap- preached by John NJ. Johnson, who asked him his business, to which he replied he did not know. At this Shields stated Johnson remarked that he would not stand for him coming here and trying to intimidate men and prevent them from going to work and that he would not have their kind of people hanging around there; that ] if he wanted to be q man to get job ! and go to work. After a wordy ar
 gument. in which it is alleged John
 son placed his hand on his pistol l pocket. shields struck out for Low ell in quest of sn officer. but accord 1 ing to his story was not able to find one. and came back, escorted by five SlaYonians. who had been advised of the trouble, but were cautioned not 1 to say anything. At sight of them it ! is claimed Johnson remarked: 'Is 1 that all the Dage' recruits you could
 get2' to which Shields states he did not reply. Shields further testified { that Johnson said that if he (Shields) | started any trouble be Johnsont would put a bullet in his belly, and l furthermore. if his house or any oth- CT burns down, he would get him and 1 that other fellow. meaning Cooper. At i this time Deputy Sheriff Will White and Constable Wilmoth rode up and Shields got on the train and rode into Bisbee, and went to the office of the Western Federation of Miners, where he saw a Mir Grove and return ed to Lowell and swore out the com plaint against Johnson.
 Upon being further questioned, he stated that he was not afraid of John son only on the railroad tracks.
 Danny McMillian. barkeeper at the Legal Tender Saloon at Lowell was called to corroborate Shields
 statement that he returned to Lowell for an officer. This ended the testt mony. so far as the witnesses were
 concerned.
 ! Attorney George Neale moved that
 the court dismiss the charge, as the
 prosecution had failed to substanti
 ate it's complaint Attorney Kearnel
 bitterly opposed the motion. The
 court. however. after 4 short deiiber ation. granted Attorney Neale's re quest. and this ended the first skirm ish. The testimony in tthe case O Cooper and Johnson, being virtually the same. the court, after listening ts arguments by Attorneys Neale ant CIeary dismissed the charge also There are still two remaining case 1 against both Shields and Coope which will be tried tomorrow morn ling at 10 o'clock, John M. Johnson being the complaining witness Il
 both cases.
 At the outset Of his cross-examina lion of Shields. Attorney Neale for tn
 defense showed that he intended U % fully into the matter Of the form e~'s being present at the railroa' . track. He first asked the witness wh. he went to the track, and Shield , stated that he wanted Co see wao go , on and of the train. Scage asked he had zone there for another purpose | and at this point counsel for the prose
 cution entered an objection to tn
 question. which was egerTuied, and th witness was instructed to answel
 Counsel for the defense again Fepaie the question. and again received a ev2sfge answer Neale then by a nun Der of questions in quick successio obtained from the witness the admii sion that he had gone there for tn tlpurpose of inducing men to stay ava from work. Neale then asked:
 ll Didn't you know that it was ul II lawful for you to go there and 1T
 to induce men to stay away fro'
 workz"
 Fl Counsel for the prosecution agal ilobjeeted on the ground that the que | tion called for conclusion of lax | Neaie insisted on the question an 1.-the court oveTruied the objection TT Ii question was repeated. and the VI | ness said:
 t No; I didn't"
 l Then you didn't know you we | committing a crime by going the i Hand trying to induce these men to st' llaway from work2r
 ] At this point counsel for the pros ! cution asked why if the witness hi
 | committed crime he had not be
 arrested, to which Neaie qsiickly ]
 iitorted that although 1t was not obl!f
 ! tory on the defeue to have the vitne
 arrested. he was not sure but, tn
 I aurE action r71foht be taken