Arizona republican., 1910-04-27
THE AcQU|TTAl OF OLIVER
(Continued from page 1.)

something of the procedure of the kangaroo court was discuosed. It was brought out that the judge of the court was Edwards: the sheriff. one Ruiz. and the district attorney, Daley. All three of them testified that these tools had been taken from the prisoners who had been put into jail and that it was the practice to turn such treasure trove over to the custody If Judge Edwards ! for safe keeping that no impropert use might be made of it. Improbable as was the statement that all this junk could have escaped the search of the outside jailor. it evidently impressed the jury.
 Much was also made by the defense of the fact that Greenfield had left the country al the time of the humiliation of the jail and that thefore oliver could have had no motive for trying to break out.
 IL is stated that when the jury be- gan it's deliberate it stood nine for conviction and three for acquittal: little later, under the persuasive ar guments of the minority against the blighting by a conviction of a useful career. the nipping of bud cf prom ise, the majority dwindled away on each successive ballot until just before the end there were ten for acquittal. When the now majority began to talk of sending out for blankets for the night. the other two surrendered
 Oliver had not taken the stand and the court had instructed the jury that that fact should be weighed against him. That instruction is always given in such cases. but in this case it ap- peared that the jury weighed that fact Tin his flavor. His seif-repression was not to be without it's reward.
 Olivsris Rules of Conduct.
 While the jury was out Oliver, who was sitting by the sheriff. engaged him in conversation. "I make it rule" said Oliver. meyer to plead guilty: it can't do you any good and it may do you a great deal of harm
 Out of his experience, Oliver de- scribed 10 the sheriff another reguia ton of criminal conduct: T also make il d rule never to go on the stand or take an active part in my defense In that way l do not complicate the sit uation for my lawyer and I am in no danger of saving anything thar might wish had not been said
 A very good rule" observed the sheriff. Tn this case Bullard would probably have asked you something about the Q. P. Dump" Uhe vernacu- lar for the Ohio penitentiary) for the sheriff had had an intimation that Oli- yer had done time there. though he had not been fully informed. At this casual observation. Oliver started and under further questioning he told why he had been there. IL was a story of murder
 An Admitted Murder Oliver said that some years ago he shot man at Dayton. Ohio The shooting took place one night It was not his intention, Oliver said. to kill and he had reason to believe that he was not suspected of the affair. The man fingered, but sank slowly. and when it was evident that he was go- ing to die shortly. oliver. who knew him. further to remove himself from suspicion. with some other acquaint- ances visited the chamber of the dying man. who reused pointed his finger at him and said. He did it.
 Oliver was arrested. convicted of murder in the first degree and was sentenced to the penitentiary for life His father. who was wealthy and influ- ential. secured a ne wtrial for him and he was convicted of manslaughter and was given an indeterminate sentence Of from one to twenty years. He was released at the end of five years. less than year ago. and came west.
 The California courts are noted for the way they bear down on malefac tors. and it is estimated that with his record of forgery at Los Angeles he will get about twenty years at Folsom or San Quentin.
 An Accomplished Crook.
 Altogether. Oliver is believed to be the most accomplished crook that the county jail has perhaps ever held. He