Albuquerque citizen., 1907-11-22
Indications In Lost Spanish
Bullion Cases Are Against
the Defendants Request
for Rehedring.
ACCUSE COURT OF
PRfJUDICIEG JURY
They Declare That He Ruled
Against Them WrongfulIy and
in Other Ways Caused Trial
to Go Against Them DE
CiSlon Expected.

Denver, Colo, Nov 22.-Indica-
tions at the Adjournment of the
United States district court whore the
case against the defendants in the
Lost Bullion Spanish Mines company
Is up on a hearing for new trial.
point toward denial of the motion,
Arguments began at 10 O'Clock. At
torney Charles w. Franklin present
ing the contention of the defendants
until adjournment. Judge Lewis i'm
commenting upon the attorneys ar
to rule against him.
AZ the close of the day he made a
slgnlncant remark in answer to At
tofney Franklin's contention that
Judge Lewis had greatly injured his
case and prejudiced the jury by maxi
ing comments during the trial which
destroyed the credibility of the de-
tenses witnesses In the eyes of the
jury.
The court cannot see where its re-
marks would have made any differ
ence in the end. The evidence against
the deiendants was so overwhelming
that any remarks that were made
could have had no influence i'm the
end said Judge Lewis.
we do not look upon II that way"
replied Attorney Franklin, FOR IL
seems to us that the remarks of the
court were very largely responsible
Tor the conviction of the defendants
in forcing US to assume the burden of
proof whereas by all rules of law IL
should have remained upon the pros
cution. The court assumed this atti-
tude early in the 0al and we were
forced to assume the defensive
throughout because of that fact"
Wives Present.
Several of the wives of the defend
ants are in the court room, hanging
on every word that masses
between the court and ATTORNEYS, Mrs
George Dubois is said to be critically
Ill at 1880 Grant avenue, because of
her husbands conviction, and bad
news may be serious in her case.
The defendants have brought a car
OF ore from the Lost Bullion mine to |
Denver and had X smelted. 1t ran
something over $26 a ton. This was
done TO prove that the mine has ore |
In II, but the government officials will |
probably try to prove that this ore |
was taken to large extent from an |
other mine.
Shipment of Ore.
"a frequent question of the prosecu-
ton and court during the trial of the
case, and which was made one of the |
objections by Attorney Franklin, was
as to why the defendants did not ship
any ore from the mine during the
lme the company was organized and
circulars advertising the stock ship
ped through the mail.
attorney Franklin answered this
Dy saying that the court erred in rel
,erring to the loose ore covering the
ioors of the mine. which witnesses
laVe referred to-" The witnesses In
question, declared Attorney Franklin.
aid distinctly that this was not ore
'ut debris, common rock, or the ref
a q N.Ur 4 h.. wNs.s.l
openings of the mine, he also declar-
ID, were far up gulch. off any wag-
IA road, with not even a trail leading
o them, and the good faith of the
lefendanLs was shown by the work
hey We're doing at this time in build
ng road and erecting dwellings for
he miners.
What Bullion" Is.
Another objection made was 10 the | ,
eferred to by one of the defense's
illnesses. This man said that he !
ound piece of Stag, dug into the !
round and found more, with several :
ieces of bullion. He said that he did
OF know what IL was at the time but
'ok II to Mr. Du Bois, who told him. y
The court persisted during the
'ial,' said Franklin, 'in calling this :
ag. when quoting the witnesses"
The general trend OF the objections
Franklin were basd upon the in I
'oduction OF evidence allowed by
udge Lewis and the latter's COM
tents. Franklin especially objected ]
the Introduction OF Attorney Kais-
IS testimony The latter was the
deral attorney who conducted the
Yestigation in Washington when the
aud order was Issued. His testi-
ony was introduced, together with
lie so-called confessions of the two
u Bois. This according to Franklin
as an entirely different charge and
e confessions obtained under du-
IS and threat OF arrest. They are
nials of guilt, he maintained, but II
ntain admissions. which the district "
torney contradicted at the consplr-
v trial I'm Denver TO prove the un-
liability OF the witnesses. His OBJ
,tions We're ON constitutional
Ouuds