The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-05-07
ACCUSED CONSPIRATORS ASK
COURT FOR INDICTMENTS


-, ,.,...,
nation as to the feature of the charge
against him."
Senator Borah, who spoke for the
State. said that the defense was MOI
seeking EXPERIMENTATION of the indict
ment but possession of the evidence BY
which the State hopes to prove its case
He then explained that the charge thai
Haywood was at Caldwell whNa--$,ss
murder was committed was necessary
under the Idaho statutes. He drew at
tention to the fact that there was
provision in the Idaho statutes y 4
granting bills of particulars.
Senator Borah said that the indftt.
ments as to murder were surely spe.
cific enough to show the prisoner the
exact nature of the charge he mus
meet. The demand for particulars as
to the conspiracy was a demand fol-
evidence.
&c. ator Borah further sid that nei-
ther the statutes of IDAHO nor the decis-
lon anywhere, provide that the defend
ants, in case of this character. were
entitled to the details of tie evidence
against them.
Clarence barrow followed Senator b.
rah with the closing argument in sup
port of the motion.
Court Must Decide.
MT. barrow salp that about all there
was to the provision was that If the
court thought 1t was fair to have the
bill of particulars 1t could grant It, 1t
was all within the disci elton of the
court and IL the court declined the mo-
tfon. the Supreme Court of the State
could not reverse its ruling. The fact
that there was no salute on the subject
in Idaho does not effect the matter of
the court. 1t was purely question
~ ffrtxf ~
OF fairness and justice to the defendant.
Mr. Borah says we do not want a
the evidence" said Mr.. barrow. why
are we not entitled to know what the
evidence will show, so that we may pre-
pare to meet it?'
Mr.. Darrow pointed out that there
had been no disclosure Of evidence at a
preliminary hearing and that the State
had carefully concealed its case. He
said that the prosecutors were not trap
pers seeking victims; this was q civiliz-
ed community and the prisoners were
entitled to fair treatment. He declar-
ed that the Orchard confession should
be placed before the counsel. He i'm
mediately declared that 1t was unjust
to bring the prisoners 1000 miles from
home and not give them g. fair chance
to openly meet the case. The case OF
the state was a mystery that unfairly
handicapped the authorities He asked
that the particulars be given and said
the defendants were entitled to adjourn
ment, IL necessary, In order that their
rights might be protected.
Witnesses Are Unknown.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Darrow's ar
gument, he stated that the subpoenas
for the State had been issued in blank
and 1t had been impossible for the de-
Tense to secure the names of witnesses.
To this Senator Borah replied that 1t
was tue the subpoenas had been issued
in blank because, IL the prosecution re-
vealed the names of their witnesses.
they would not have been able TO get
them to the court house. Senator Boz
rah said that within the last twenty
four hours, two of their most important
witnesses from Colorado had disappear
ed. one entirely. and another refusing
to return to Idaho to testify.
Mr.. barrow said that counsel for
the defense had only the newspapers
for a source of information. 1t was
as much the duty of counsel for the
prosecution to protect the prisoners. as
the court and the counsel for the de-
Tense Judge Wood asked:
Does the court understand that the
defense Is not ready to proceed to
trial?" Mr.. barrow.
No we are not ready for trial. We
are working in the dark
Mr.. Richardson-We are as ready
as we ever will be under the circum-
stances. In a general legal sense we
!, Mr. Borah-why do you expect a
surprise?
Mr.. Darrow-From the reports in
the newspapers and common rumor.
Mr. Borah-What am / to under
stand, that you desire a bill of partic-
ulars?
Mr. Richardson declared that Mr..
Borah made no distinction between
the overt acts concerning which the
prisoner sought information and evil
dence dealing with these overt acts.
He said he had interrupted his associ-
ate because he thought he was not an
swering the question.
Defense's First Chance.
The court asked for the information
as to the date of the original plea, APP
peal and other steps in the case as
showing the time that the defense
might have made the motion for the
bill of particulars. Mr.. Richardson
and Mr.. barrow drew attention to
the change of venue and postpone
mont and said this was really the first
opportunity that had presented itself
Mr.. Borah. responding to. the refer
ence of secrecy about summoning wit
nesses and the charges of unfairness.
SAID that only WITHIN the last twenty
four hours the State had lost two an
portant witnesses in Colorado. II the
names of the witnesses were revealed
the State would lose them. He said
if he knew his own heart, he was rot
going to be unfair to the defendants;
he was not thirsting for. nor wanted
any mans blood. but there was a duty
to be performed by the State and il
was going to be performed. 1here
probably was no way to answer the
charge of umfairness by the defense, but
he could only say what he had in re-
ply,
Mr.. barrow said that If the remarks
of Senator Borah carried another in
situation as to the defense and the
States witnesses. that he would say
the defense was having the same diff
Guilty about securing the attendance of
witnesses.