Bisbee daily review., 1911-10-08

safGeN as maternal WltneSS TOT me state. II she is called to the stand, it is asserted. witnesses found by de. tectives who have been searching her life and record for weeks and months. will be produced 10 testify against her.
 New indictments
 On May ,, the day after McManigal had testified, the grand jury returned twenty-one new indictments. One of these held McManigal responsible for the Llewellyn Iron Works explosion. Another charged John J. McNaluara with complicity as cO-conspirator in the Llewellyn case. The other nine teen true bills related to The Times case. alleging that nineteen of the twenty victims were murdered by John J. McNamara, James B. McNa- mara. Milton A. Schmidt, David Cap Ian. John Doe. Richard Roe and Jane Doe. The Does and Roe, according to the prosecution, were placed in the list of accused as a precaution in the event that any other alleged conspir' ators are found
 Clarence $. Darrow took charge of the defense on May %. Mrs. McMBn- igal entered the case two weeks later
 She came 10 Los Angeles from Chi. Cago.
 Later she was summoned to testify before the grand jury. and for three days she pitted her wits against those of the deputy prosecutor desi gnated 10 question her.
 Divided Household
 On the second day detectives for the prosecution brought McManigal over from the jajl and confronted his vie with him. She emerged from the interview sc,eaming with hysteria. Subsequently McManigal, in the presence of Burns detectives, gave a statement to reporters that the de fense was using his wife to induce him to deny his testimony, but that he would stick to the prosecution. He also declared that he was not permit ted to see his children because he would not change sides.
 With Mir. Darrow's arrival in May plans for the defense were begun The time for ths McNAmaTas to en ter their pleas to the murder indict ments was deferred until July 6. but on that date instead Of entering pleas Mir DarroW, backed by attorneys Jos eph Scott, Cyrus McNutt atd Le compie Davis, who had been retained with Hartman to assist him. assailed the jurisdiction of Judge Bordwell tC try the case. This attack was based on the alleged fact that John J. Nc Namara had been Illegally taken out of Indiana When this failed, they entered a motion 10 quash the in dictments, and when this motion was denied. a bill Of exception, useful as a ground work for an appeal should such become necessary, was filed.
 "Not Guilty"
 The pleas were then made-"not guilty" to each Of the nineteen charg es-and the trial was set for October II.
 On certain points relative to the presence of James McNamara in Cal ifornia, the evidence of the prOsecu ton is believed to consist mainly oi signatures on the registers of hotels where Brice was a guest in Sausa ito. San Francisco and Los Angeles Handwriting experts therefore will Dc prominent among the experts called in the trial
 It is believed here that three lines Of defense are open, namely:
 To establish an alibi, by proving that James B. McNamara, the only one of the prisoners whom it is al legged actually placed the bombs il Los Angeles, was not here at the time of the disaster.
 Or to achieve the same result by leaving the burden of proof upon the state, and then demonstrating to thu jury that the prosecution had no proved that James B. McNamara wa in Los Angeles on or about october l 1910.
 Or Co prove that the destruction O the Times building was not caused by dynamite but by the huge volume Of gas used for heating the metal ii the linotype machines of the news paper
 The Line of Defense
 The faffar auUareufIr fz fhp lin