Polk County observer. (Monmouth, Polk County, Or.) 1888-1927, 1910-02-15
JURY FAILS TO AGREE
CASE AGAINST BINGER HERMANN
MUST BE TRIED AGAIN.
Nearly Forty Eight Hours Spent in
EndeavOr to Reach Verdict
Brief History of Case.

Brief History of Case.
PORTLAND, Or, Feb. 14-(Spec
ial to Observer. 1.-The great Hermann
trial is ended, as far as the first tria
is concerned, with a hung jury
The case was important in many re-
spects and especially interesting il
view of the prominence of person:
charged in the Indictment Mr.. Her.
mann was tried alone, others charged
in the indictment with him having
been either committed or dismissed.
The charge, divested of its lega
verbiage, was that in 1901 Bingel
Hermann, F. p Mays and others con-
spired to purchase a lot of State land
in the Blue Mountains, then create g
Forest Reserve, and thus, having theil
land taken from them, get scrip in its
place worth about Sc an acre.
The plan as claimed by the Govern
ment was that Mays would purchase
a large lot of State land at $1.25 an
acre, pay one third down, get a re-
serve created out of their land thus
emitting them to the scrip. 1t was
within the especial jurisdiction of Mr.
Hermann, as Commissioner of the
General Land Office, to create forest
reserves.
To this Indictment, Mr.. Hermann
entered a plea of not guilty. The trial
was begun January 10 and ended Feb
ruary a. The Government was repre-
sented by Francis j. Heney, and the de-
fendant by Mr.. Worthington of Wash
ington, d. c., and John M. Gearin, of
Portland. A full report of all the points
made would fill a whole page, so the
Observer will give only the salient
points in the case.
Hermann's Political Ambition.
Mr.. Heney claimed that Hermann
was ambitious to become United
States Senator from Oregon; that he
was very anxious to secure the polit-
ical support of Mr.. Mays; that this
could be secured by placing Mays un-
der personal obligation to him; that
to do so, Hermann must be inatten-
tive to the Government interests by
doing a lawful thing for an unjust or
wrongful purpose. In other words,
that it was perfectly lawful for Mr..
Hermann to create a forest reserve,
but that it was evidently stand in"
to create one in the exact spot where
Mr.. Mays had accidentally CD pur-
chased a large lot of State land, worth
but little in the market and of still less
valuable when it became represented
by scrip that could be used in secur-
ing from the Government an equal
number of acres of valuable land else
where and used by the holder in Sc
curing title to such land. The Govern
ment did not claim that Hermann was
to benefit financially, but rather Incl
dentally in furthering his political
ambition.
1t appeared from the testimony of
Henry Meldrum that Hermann entered
into the arrangement with Mays. The
defense claimed in this connection that
Hermann had published in the Ore
gonian an interview in which he took
strong ground against the creation of
any more forest reserves, and also had
in evidence the reports of Mr.. Her
mann to Congress against the creation
of reserves.
Mr.. Heney asked the jury to consid-
er this question: "Tf Mays and others
believed Hermann sincere, or, in other
words, if they did not know what
Hermann would do, would they have
spent large sums of money in purchas-
ing land that the evidence showed was
not worth SO cents an acre?"
Meldrum's Testimony Important.
The Government attorney contended
strenuously for the truth of Meldrum' s
testimony; in fact, this testimony was
the storm center of the case. The de-
fense sought to attack it by various
means. One witness was very positive
that no conversation was had by her
and Meldrum, except she said: II dp-
piled once for a position in MeldrurI's
office. never talked with him but
once, and all of the conversation was
simply asking him if he had place
for me. He said no. 1 told him good
day and never called again." The pro-
seeution had proved some very dani-
aging things as having been said by
this witness to Meldrum and the wit
ness was confronted with letters writ
ten by Hermann in which he referred
to her letters to him about having
called twice to see Meldrum and sbout
lengthy conversation she reported TO
Hermann as having had with Mel
drum.
All through the case, to every little
conversation and every little contra
diction, apparent or real, the respect
i've attorneys directed their argum mt.
Nothing escaped either side. Much
amusement was created by some of
Hermann's letters to Brownell. Loomis
and Ormsby. in which he asked their
support for Senator.
Weakened by Cross Examination.
Mr.. Hermann's cross examination
weakened him quite materiallv--not
in any one thing he said, b:t in his
seeming lack of frankness, If inno-
cent. Heney made much of this. The
defense devoted much attention to
Meldrum and bitterly assailed his tes-
timOny as that of one still having two
indictments hanging over him.
The defense had many Of the lead
ing men Of oregon testify as TO Her
mann's good reputation for honesty,
and it also pressed home with effect
the evident intent Of two Of the Gov
ernment witnesses to force Mr.. Her
mann out Of public life. One witness
who was very damaging in his testi-
mony. II believed. was shown to have
been in the employ Of Hyde and Ben
son. land fraud men. while holding a
confidential position in the land Office
under Hermann This man was cleerly
shown up to be a scOundrel. not only
by his own confession but by docU-
mentary evidence
Much was made by the prosecution