The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1909-11-26
ARGUMENTS on MOTION TO
0uASH THE SMITH INDICTMENT

davlt that at the preliminary nearing
in July, Smith said that he had no
attorney, and wished one appointed.
J. E. Robb and A. N. Riley made
affidavits to the effect that Smith
knew within few days after June
% that Geddes was retained to assist
the state. t
Mr.. Peterson said that the weight
of proof as we'll as the law was
against the motion.
Affidavits in Rebuttal.
Mr.. Schaub presented two affidavits
in rebuttal The first was by Frank
Smith, who admitted J.. E. Robb's
statement, but said that it was after
June % that he thought that Mr..
Geddes had taken mis- case. He under
stood the English language imper--
fectly, and his health was not good
then. g. G. Phillips had called on
him frequently and said he was de-
tective for the state and working for
Mr.. Geddes, who would help him
(Smith) in his case, He led the at
faint all along to believe this. He
heard Mr. Plymat say that Geddes
was in the case, but that he did not
understand that he was engaged by
the state, but thought he was his
attorney.
Arthur Schaub made affidavit, de-
claring as absolutely untrue, Mr..
Geddes' statement IN mis- affidavit that
he never said to Frank Smith that
he would let said Frank Smith out
on said prosecution as an accessory,
or anything to that effect. and never
said 10 him that he would see that
all said Smith would be punished for
would be rs an accessory. and never
said or told anything of that kind
or nature TO said Frank Smith"
Schaub's Affidavit.
Mr.. Schaub's affidavit proceeded:
THAT when this affiant was first con-
suited by said Frank Smith as an at
tornev in this matter, this afflant,
learning of the treacherous and unlaw-
full visits of said Geddes to said Frank
Smith, desired him-the said Geddes
to discontinue same, unless affiant
were present. That shortly thereafter
this affiant and w. r. Geddes did
call upon the defendant Smith and
then and there the said Geddes, Ill
the presence and hearing of this at
faint said, substantially, that he be-
1ieved the defendant guilty of no more
than an accessory after the fact, and
that if said Smith told the truth that
was all he would be tried for, and
that then and there said Smith told
said Geddes, upon such promise, some
of the facts concerning the murder of
Holland j. Ledbeter, of which the de-
PENDANT stood accused
THAT some three weeks ago affi-
ant was informed by said Smith that
said w. R. Geddes had again called
upon him, without the knowledge of
this affiant, and told said Smith that
he thought the state would be obliged
to try him for manslaughter in the
second degree and not for accessory
after the fact, as had been first prom
ised by him. 7'r4
'That Immediately thereafter this
affiant called upon said w. r. Geddes
at his office and inquired of him the
truth or falsity of such statement.
That said w. R. Geddes then and
there admitted to this affiant that
read to affiant the law of the state
of Minnesota on the crime of man.
slaughter in the second degree, stating
further to affiant that he could not
keep his promise to Smith to try
him for accessory after the fact only,
because he believed there were some
facts in the case that might point to
the crime of manslaughter in the Sec
ond degree.
"That for long time prior hereto
the said w. r. Geddes induced the
said Frank Smith, as well as the sher-
if of Blue Earth county, to believe
that said Smith would be tried for
accessory after the fact only, and it
was only through such promises, that
said Geddes secured the admissions
from aid Frank Smith, which affiant
firmly believes were the only facts
connected with the murder of Holland
J. Ledbeter known to said w. X.
Geddes."
Schaub Addressed the Court.
Mr.. Schaub then addressed the court
with his argument. He said that
there were three grounds for the mo-
ton. first. that Mr.. Geddes had un-
lawfully appeared before the grand
jury; second, that he gave evidence
that was privileged; and third, that
he obtained evidence by promises to
Smith The facts stated were cor
roborated by county officers, and many
Of them not denied. Mr.. Geddes had
degraded his sacred office almost down
to that of detective. and had visited
the Jail day after day and evening
after evening, and was assisted by his
henchman, that great detective, Gates
Phillips. Smith needed an attorney
and should have had one to protect
him from the attorney for the state.
Promises are not only made by di-
rect words but by facts and circum-
stances. Smith and others were led
to believe that he would get off on a
ligher charge, by words and acts.
! Mr.. Schaub stated that Mr.. Geddes
had time and again told him that
Smith would be let off with the charge
of accessory after the fact, and after
wards was sorry and wanted to
change it to manslaughter in the Sec
ond degree and had read the law on
it. He did not believe the attorney
would or could deny it.
Il deny it." said Mr. Geddes.
Mr. Schaub said that Mr.. Geddes
had said that he had told Smith of
the necessity of changing the charge.
1t was not denied that all that Mr..
Geddes knew Of ne murder was what
Smith had told him, yet his name APP
pears on the indictments against the
other defendants. He was not making