Mountain Home maverick. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1906-1911, 1910-03-24
LAND CASES
SET FOR JUNE
JUDGE DIETRICH REFUSES TO
ALLOW TRIAL GO TO
FALL TERN.
Very Positive in Setting Date and
Announces He VIII Continue
Court Until Cases Are Entirely
Finished and Decision Rendered.

BOISE, March 24.-During a ses-
sion this morning of the United States
district court. which was punctured
with arguments for continuance, un-
certainty as to the best and more con-
venient time in which to go to trial,
demands by Assistant Attorney
Peyton Gordon that some definite date
be set for the north Idaho timber
fraud conspiracy cases, Judge Frank
Dietrich took hand and after refus-
ing to grant the plea of counsel for
the defendants in the Great Western
Beet Sugar company case involving
John II. Garrett, Fred B. Daniels, w.
c. HOWE, S. j. Colthrop and c. J.
Griffiths, declared that three months
time was sufficient in which the de-
PENDANTS could prepare for trial, and
he would set the case for the latter
part of June, probably the goth, at
a special term of court Judge
Dietrich further stated in his opinion
too many cases are now dragging on
the calendar and that instead of plac-
ing its business behind, the court was
piling it up: that he did not believe
in the practice and would endeavor
in the future to relieve the congested
condition.
When court convened this morning,
E. ]. Dockery, counsel for John H.
Garrett, and associated with counsel
for the other defendants. acting as
spokesman, appealed to the court to
reconsider his intention to set the
cases for trial in June. Mr.. Dockery
declared that he assumed that counsel
for the defendants was entitled to
cite to the court their rights and that
they proposed to stand by those
rights. He declared that in his opinion
it would be decidedly unfair to bring
the defendants to trial within three
months, and that by so doing the
court would be acting with more
rapidity than preceding ones had
done, for il has been common prac-
case to go over from one term TO
the other a privilege which was not
being granted to his clients.
1t was also contended by Mr.. Dock
cry that in view of the fact the testi-
mony would require a wide range
and witnesses would have to be sum-
moned from a large area, it was
necessarily impossible for the defend
ants to appear in court in June and
make the showing that they wished
in order to meet the charges of con-
spiracy and subornation preferred by
attention of the court that the de-
PENDANTS were not men of great
financial means, and that it would be
impossible for them to employ the
large number of agents which is
within the power of the government;
that they are law abiding citizens
of the state and employed in various
vocations which they cannot very
well leave at this time. Counsel also
stated that in his opinion be believed
the month of June would make it in
convenient for the court to go ahead
Win opCCuS tiAdif dc IL WOulQ De
difficult to secure the jury. 1t was
Mr.. Dockery's contention that the
defendants were not pleading for an
unnecessary delay, but that they were
asking for what they believed are
their rights and that if the trial went
over until the fall term they would
be prepared for trial. Speaking for
his client, John H. Garrett, he said
that in fixing the trial date in June
it would become necessary for Mr.
Garrett to drop his work almost i'm.
mediately and come to Idaho to pre-
pare to meet the allegation.
Judge Dietrich was unmOved by
the appeal of counsel for the de-
PENDANTS, and declared he believed
they would be given ample time in
which to prepare to meet the charge.
against them. for three months wa.
sufficient for them to do so. The
court stated that he wished to cleal
the calendar just as speedily as pos
sible and that he did not want
cases dragging on over a period o
months or years as had been in the
practice heretofore. but to have then
go to trial as soon as possible ant
leave the court free to take up othel
matters. So far as the month o.