Amador ledger., 1910-01-21
The Nichols Case.

The case Of People VS.. Id. Nichols
for felinous assault upon a girl under
legal age named Pearl Hamm in Jackson
valley, was commenced in the superior
court Monday morning. The prosecu-
tion was represented by district attorney
Vicini, and A. Caminetti, the latter be-
ing specially employed by the relatives
of the girl to assist the prosecution The
defendant was represented by w. j.
McGee. E. F. Duden of Sacramento was
the official reporter. An entire day was
taken up in getting the jury. The fol-
lowing we're finally accepted and sworn
to try the case John c. RAIDER, !.
Bastian, Charles Currier, Geo. E.
Vela, E. F. Bryant, w. White, E.
Botto, VIM. Penry sr, John F. Wharf,
Thomas H. Bolitho John w. Waters,
A. Cayagnaro.
The defense made a motion that the
prosecution declare itself as to which
offense it proposes to prosecute-the one
of May 26, 1909, or that Of September
in the same year, the testimony at the
preliminary examination referred TO
both but the Indictment was based on
that of May 26. The court held that the
prosecution must conhne itself to the
one act of May 26. AS the question
might come up in another form during
the trial, it was agreed by the attorneys
that notice would be given to each other
Mrs Florentina Hamm, mother OF the
prosecuting witness, testified that her
daughter Pearl was IA years and 4
months old on the 26th of Nav, 1909. At
that time defendant came to her house
and asked that the daughter be allowed
to go and help during harvest time.
Defendant is an uncle of the prosecuting
witness by marriage. Both parties live
in Jackson valley, the ranches being
two or three miles apart. She went to
defendants place to assist in cooking on
May 26 and returned on Saturday, May
%. Witness had known defendant for
over l6 years always friendly and
visited each other
On Tuesday the complaining witness,
Pearl Hamm was placed on the stand.
She is child in appearance and does
not look more than Is years of age.
Under examination she became
somewhat mixed up, but on the whole
told her terrible story in a straightfor-
ward and consistent way. She related
that the crime was committed by vio-
lence on the part Of the defendant, that
she resisted his attentions, but was
poWerlesS to prevent the accomplish
h1ent of his purpose. Her testimony
occupied Tuesday until Wednesday
afternoon. She did not inform her
parents of the matter, until October,
about five months after the crime.
Letters alleged to be addressed to the
parties were the means of arousing
suspicion. A letter was given TO her by
defendant which she took nome and
showed to her mother on the 26th of
September. She told her mother of what
occurred because of letter, which tended
to put the blame upon an innocent man.
The complainant related that she was
shown letter by defendant, and made
copy from memory. The copy was not
allowed to be read. The exhibites were
introduced as such. Certain known
signatures and writing of defendant
were introduced, but the court
would not permit the introduction OF
expert testimony TO connect the defend
ant with the writing of the letters. as
being too remote, and not bearing upon
the alleged crime This ruling was
setback to the prosecution. The case
then rested almost solely upon the
testimony of the prosecuting witness.
Roy Miller testified to having received
the letter NAKED "B" through the
Ritchey post Office about July l3, and
showed the same to Hamm on the 4th
Or 5th of October.
The two ANONYMOUS letters are as fol-
lows
Peoples Exhibit. No 2
"Mr Dow Nicholos-well say don't
you know that you are not welcome a
the hamm place if you don't you had ort
to know it as we all know it pearl says