Montana news. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1904-191?, 1907-11-07
Special Correspondenee.

Rathdrum, Ida, Oct. 80.
The selection of the jury in the
Steve case is still occupying the time
of the court At the present writing
the jury box is full of men accepted
for cause by both sides; ana each side
has used one of its ten peremptory
challenges. There does not seem to be
the reluctance at serving on the jury
here that was so visible at Boise.
Indeed most Of the jurors seems as
though they would like the job. Both
sides are asking as to the reading Of
the juror. Judge Woods has refused
to allow any queries as to the politics
of the juor TO be injected into the ex-
animation.
William Freeman, a livery man who
lives at st. Marys, is a juror that the
defense tried hard to get rid of but
the judge would not allow the chal-
lenge. He is on intimate terms with
the relatives of Tyler ana Boulier, one
of the men who was murdered in that
country, at one time worked for him.
Freeman said he thought the governor
was doing his duty in prosecuting
| Adams.
The defense is questioning steadily
as to whether the jurors know Warden
Whitney of the state penitentiary, and
as to their attitude toward him. Whit
ney was formerly sheriff of Kootenai
county and is to be one of the princi-
pal witnesses in the case. 1t is pre-.
sumed that he is to testify in regard
to the fake confession of Adams
There is close questioning also in re-
gard to Bartlett Sinclair, a lawyer in
Rathdrum, who was attorney general
under Steunenberg at the time of the
trouble in the Occur d'Alenes and
made his name one of the universal
exeeration among the miners. He is
son-in-law Of Whitney.
L. B. Willis, one of the editors Of
the Coeur d'Alenes Journal, is an
other juror that the defense has fought
hard to get rid off but has been unable
to make it. His paper has been motor
ious in the attacks on the accused men
Of the Federation, and has the contract
for the state printing from Governor
Gooding.
Jacob Wolfgang, a farmer from Wolf
Lodge, while seemingly a very fair
man in every other way, proved to be
a hero-worshipper of Whitney and
thought he would give more eredence
to what he would say than to a wit.
ness that he didn't know. Mr.. Darow
told him to think over the matter over
night. In the morning he was pos.
tive he could not give the prisoner
justice IL Whitney was witness, so
he was dismissed for cause.
II. p. knight, the prosecuting attor-
ney, is making several kinds of differ.
ent fools of himself in this trial. He
is young, and of an apparently pleas
ing and sincere disposition. But his
every motion shows his inexperience
His moves are childish, boyish and
trivial. Every time he is saying
anything, he is doing good for
the Federation cause because his
foolish remarks are so eonspicuously
misplaced. He makes the very
common mistake of an inexper-
ienced man of attempting TO stub
bornly oppose an able and experienced
attorney like Mr.. Darrow, and as a
result he comes out worsted in every
encounter. He is not in the least
witty, but he tries to appear so. He
makes himself ridiculous by denying
every remark Mr.. Darrow makes even
on old established points of law where
even the spectators can see the super
iority of Mr.. Darrow's position. For
instance, he undertakes TO define cir.
cumstantial evidence for a juror. Mr..
Darrow objected to his explanation
and gave a very Gear definition in a
few words. Knight, with his unfor.
tunate prediction Of rushing in where
angels fear TO tread, said the leGni.
tion was vague. "But not so vague
as yours" replied the judge. OF
course the room broke forth In n roar
At another time after n long and in
volved question matter-of fact juror
told him to state the matter plainly
so he could understand It. He replied
helplessly that he could not change
1t, whereupon the juror put the sub
stance in few words himself and
answered the question,
AT one time Knight flung II al
Darrow that he didn't believe II