The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-05-06
HAS COSTS52,OOO
Idaho Has Already Paid That
Sum on Account
OF the Trial of Meyer, Haywood
and PettibOne.
VOTED $4,000 MORE.
The Defense Has Accumulated
an Enormous Fund.
1t Is Thought Case Will Pro-
ceed on Day Set.
VOTED $4,000 MORE.

| room III BOISE, inc cdplldA
city of Idaho. has been reserved for
lawyers, witnesses or newspaper men
in attendance on the court which will
try William d. Haywood for the MUIR
der of former Governor Steunenberg.
While there is little or no public dis
cussion of the case, the undercurrent
of interest runs strong and every in
coming train brings additions to the
very large number of people connect
| ed with the case who are already on
the ground.
That there might be some delay has
| been intimated from time to time but
the fear of this has now been dissipat-
| ed by statements emanating from both
| sides. Clarence Darrow of Chicago
| and E. +. Richardson of Denver, joint
| ly leading counsel for the defense of
| Haywood, have both stated that they
are ready for trial. Counsel for the
| prosecution, James H. Hawley and
! Senator w. F. Borah, who have been
| engaged especially, are of the opinion
| that there will be no further delay.
The history of the cases of the men
charged with the murder of Steunen-
| berg shows much delay, all of which
has been necessarily expensive to the
state of Idaho and to the defense. Tire
state has already paid bills to the
amount of $4,000 and at the last ses-
| sion of the legislature of Idaho an ap-
preparation of $4,000 additional was
| unanimously passed, all parties con-
curing.
When Governor Steunenberg was as
| sassinated, the Mine Owners associa-
ton offered a reward of $1,000 for the
arrest of the murderers. Later this
amount was returned to the Mine
Owners association by Governor
Gooding, with the statement that the
state of Idaho would defray the cost
| of the prosecution of the murderer or
| murderers, whoever they might be.
The defense fund, raised by union
| labor throughout the country, and an
| emergency fund by the Miners Fed
| Grafton is reported to be very large
| and the total cost of carrying on this
case from first to last will be enor-
nous.
James H. HawIey, the leading coun-
! sci for the prosecution, was asked to-
day to explain the reasons for the de-
lay in the trial of Haywood, Meyer and
caused throughout the country by this
! delay. 1t has been charged that the
state has willfully caused the deiay
| and that the prisoners have been kept
IN conhnement without trial for an un-
| warranted period. Mr.. HaWley said:
THE revised statutes of the United
| States treating of appeals to the United
states supreme court from United States
| circuit courts in habeas corpus where n
prisoner is held by state courts makes
null and void any action of the state
pending an appeal. The great majority
| OF courts of last resort hold any action
|
lutely void until the decision of the su-
preme court of the United States has
| been actually rendered.
'1t will be seen, therefore, that IT, in
| May, 1906, we had proceeded with the
| trial in the trial court of this state be-
| fore the decision of the supreme court
had been rendered, the defendants
would have been discharged, as they
| could not second time be put in jeop-
ardy of their lives.
Senator Borah and myself, acting for
the state, shortly before the convenin9
of the district court of Canyon county
In May, 1906, called the attention of the
defendants attorneys to this privilege
of the United States statutes and stated
in a letter to them on the subject that
We were ready and anxious for an i'm
mediate trial and if they also were ready,
| they should arrange matters so that we
could proceed to trial without harm be-
ing worked to the defendants. We point
ed out that all of their rights would be
| saved If the appeal from the circuit
court dismissed.
1.-The attorneys for the defendants an
swered our letter declining to dismiss
the appeal and expressing themselves as
fearful that a question of Jurisdiction
might arise upon the proceedings of the
supreme court of this state, which
would be injurious to them IL the ap-
peal from the United States circuit
court was dismissed.
ION the opening day of the state dis
trict court in May, 1906. we called the
attention of that court to the section of
the United States statutes and the court
after due consideration held that no
proceedings could be had in that court
as long the appeal from the United
States circuit court was pending in the
United States supreme court. This rul-
ing necessarily continued the cases until
the appeal was disposed Of"
On the cause of the delay, Clarence
Darrow of counsel for the defense
had this to say:
"The defendants have not only
been ready for trial but have insisted
on trial all the time; since the indict-
ments were returned four months
ago every motion for continuance has
been made by the state and resisted
by us. After the men were brought
to Idaho, writs of habeas corpus were
asked in the state court and the fed
eraI court to cover any question of
these cases advanced for as early
hearing as could get. The United
States statutes provide that where an
appeal is pending to the supreme
ment or execution can be carried out
pending that appeal. AS applied to
this case this statute means that IL
the defendants had been convicted,
sentence could not have been carried
out until the supreme court had
passed on the appeal. but in the
meantime the courts of Idaho had the
same right to try the men while the
appeal was pending as they had after
there could be any doubt under the
statute which there could not. the
supreme court of the United States
expressly decided the matter in this
way in the case of Mrs Rodgers OF