New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-05-07
Broadway & Nineteenth Street
HEAR HAYWOOD MOTION
Decision To-morro1o ON duplication
for Bill of Particulars.

Boise, Idaho. May 6.-Decision on the motion
of the defence for a bill of particulars in the
case of William D. Haywood. charged with the
murder of former Governor Steunenberg. which
was argued before Judge Fremont Wood to-
day. postponed until Wednesday, the day
before the trial IS scheduled to begin. BY direc-
ton of the court Haywood was brought up
from the county Jail this forenoon to at
tend the hearing the motion. Senator Borah
represented the state and Messrs. Richardson
and barrow the prisoner
The motion for the bill of particulars recites
the absence OF the defendants from Idaho at the
time the crime committed. and that the
indictments contain no information to show the
overt acts by which the state hopes 10 prove
the guilt OF Haywood.
When Mr.. Richardson had finished reading
the motion Judge Wood said: you know, Mr..
Richardson. that our state has no statute pro-
viding for bill OF particulars in such cases"
II know that such is the case" replied Mr..
Richardson. and also know that the Supreme
Court OF Idaho has he'd its attention directed TO
the subject but once. Such a motion. however.
as your honor well knows. always directs itself
TO the sound discretion Of the court
Mr.. Richardson declared that the indictment
did not charge either specific conspiracy
general conspiracy. and did not show whether II
was alleged that the defendants had conspired
to murder only Governor Steunenberg or to
murder number OF persons The defence he
said. was therefore left in the dark.
Senator Borah said that the defence was not
seeking particulars OF the indictment, but pos
session OF the evidence by which the State hoped
10 prove its case He explained that the charge
that Haywood at Caldwell when the muir
der was committed was necessary under the
Idaho statute.
He drew attention 10 the fact that there was
provision in the Idaho statutes for granting
bills OF particulars and said further that neither
the statutes of Idaho the decision OF the
courts anywhere provided that the defendants In
case OF this character were entitled to the de-
tails OF the evidence against them
Clarence Darrow said that about all there was
TO the provision was that If the court thought it
was fair 10 have the bill Of particulars II could
grant It. 1t was purely a question of fairness and
Justice 10 the defendant Mr.. Borah says we
do not want better pleading but that we are
after the evidence" said Mr.. Darrow. I'VE are
Why not? Why are not entitled 10 know
what the evidence viii show. that we may pre-
pare 10 meet it,"
Mr.. barrow stated that the subpoenas for the
state had been issued IN blank. and II had been
impossible for the defence to get the names of
witnesses. To this. Senator BOrah replied that
IT was true the subpoenas had been issued In
blank because had the prosecution revealed the
names Of their witnesses they would not have
been able TO get them TO the courthouse.
Mr.. barrow. after a discussion as TO previous
opportunity for asking for bill OF particulars
drew attention TO the secrecy concerning the
subpenaing OF witnesses by the state Mr.
Borah said that only in the last twenty-four
hours the state had lost two important Wit
nesses in Colorado. If the names OF the wit
nesses We're revealed the state would lose them
He said he knew his own heart, he was not
going to be unfair 10 the defendants he was
not thirsting for nor wanted any mans blood
but there was duty TO be performed by the
state and II was going to be performed.
Mr.. barrow said that If the remarks of Sen
ator Borah carried another insinuatiOn as TO the
defence and the states witnesses he would say
the defence was having the same difficulty about
securing the attendance of witnesses.
Judge Wood. after a recess. announced that
he would not decide the question of furnishing
the defence a bill of particulars until Wednesday
morning at 10 o'clock. Court then adjourned
for the day
President Roosevelts letter TO the committee
OF the New York labor unions. replying 10 their
request for evidence as to his for calling
Haywood Meyer and Petttbone undesirable
citizens" was published here In 1.-THE Idaho
Statesman" and aroused no little comment
Clarence barrow read the letter to Haywood,
Meyer and Pettibone this morning and made
statement later. in which he said: at do not
see what there is for the President TO do. An
we have a right, desire to ask either OF him
any other citizen is 10 leave the courts and
juries to administer the law fairly and without
prejudice and without influence from the out
side world"