The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1907-05-07

Boise Idaho, May 6.-Judge Fremont
Wood will on Wednesday next decide
if, on the eve of his trial for the muir
der OF former Governor Frank Steunen-
berg. William Haywood is entitled %
receive at the hands OF the state a bill
of particulars, specifying the overt acts
charged against him. The motion of the
defense for this disclosure of the case
OF the state was argued at length today
and at the conclusion of the discussion
the court announced that it would make
decision at the time stated.
The prisoner, under guard of Sheriff
Hodgin and two deputies, was brought
into court for the argument, and or his
counsel. both Frank Richardson. If
Denver. and Clarence barrow, of chi
cago pleaded in his behalf. Senator
Borah alone spoke in behalf OF the
state. although James H. Hawley, mis-
associate, was in the court room When
the proceedings began. The discussion,
always earnest, was characterized At
times by deep feeling and dramatic in
iensity.
Argument of Counsel.
Mr.. Richardson. who opened the ar-
Eument. contended that the indictments
was lacking particularly, that it left
the defendants in the dark as TO the
nature of the case to be presented
against them. and the attendants were
entitled 10 a more specific showing OF
the case. He submitted an extended
brief, citing a great number of authorl-
ties and presidents in favor OF his con-
nection.
Mr.. Rorah in reply declared that the
defense was seeking a disclosure of the
Droof i'm the bands of the state rather
than more perfect pleadings, and as
serted tht the reports contained no SIN
gle authority that would support such
a contention
Riqhts of the Prisoners.
Mr. barrow. who closed the argu-
1nent. began by saying that it was She
purpose of the defense to secure dis
closure OF the evidence in the hands
~ the prosecution and asked why the
defense was not entitled TO sUcn a
showing. He made a spirited attack
upon the attitude OF the prosecution
,oward its witnesses and evidence. de-
scribing it as mysterious, unfair and
unjust. He asserted that the only ques-
lion involved was one of fairness and
Justice TO the accused, laid stress on
the difficulty of securing testimony
from distant points and the danger tC
= the defense of surprise testimony
and inlpassionately asserted that The
rights of the prisoners were as much II
the hands OF tne prosecution do III tii'
keeping of the. defense.
Judge Asks Question.
In answer to Judge Wood, Mr. Oar
row said that the defense was not ready
10 go to trial. but Mr.. Richardson inter
rupted him to make the qualification
that the defense was as ready as IL eVel
could be In the circumstances whert
the case of the state was Withheld
from it. He said that in all other re-
spects the defense was ready.
Mr.. Richardson, responding in briei
10 the argument OF Mr.. Borah said thai
the counsel for the state made no dis
tinction in his arguments between .ht
overt acts which the state would see
10 show against the prisoners and tbs
evidence by which it would seek e
show the commission of the alleged
overt acts were.
Mr.. Borah closed the discussion witt
a spirited speech in which he defended
secrecy In obtaining witnesses, instanc-
ing the loss of two in Colorado yester
day. disavowed a desire for any man:
blood unjustly. and avOwed the purpos'
of the state to do its duty.