Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1912-06-07
Franklin Continues Testimony
in Bribery Trial and Submits
to Severe Grilling by Prose-
cutting Lawyers.
BURNS DENOUNCED
BY ATTORNEY
Charge Made That Detectives
Are Directing Course of
Those Trying to Convict De-
fendant.
tBy Morning Journal Special L.assd WIRE,

Los Angeles, June 6.--Bert Frank
lin testified today on cross -examina-
ton In the trial OF Clarence y. Dar-
row for alleged jury bribery. that ne
had made his first confession OF
guilt at the office and in the presence
Of Oscar Lawler, special government
prosecutor in the dynamite conspir-
acy: that he had been approached
with "A view Of getting him to turn
states evidence, by a deputy United
States marshal. and later he had APP
piled for employment to the Me--
chants and Manufacturers associa-
ton, which took a prominent part In
the Mcnamara prosecution.
In the conclusion Of Franklin's
ross-examination late this afternoon
members OF the defense declared bet
ter progress had been made with the
case during the day than at any time
since Franklin took the stand ten
days ago. Redirect examination by
Assistant District Attorney Ford was
then begun and may not be concluded
before tomorrow's adjournment.
Franklin was ON the stand all day
but his ordeal at the hands OK chief
Counsel Rogers FOR the defense. was
broken several times by verbal con-
troversies between opposing counsel,
one of which included sensational
denunciation of william J. f'urns by
| the chief counsel for the defense.
IA. Pa. .lt nm
Burns, Rogers accused the prosecu-
ton of attempting to strike at Snm-
uel Gompers, president Of the An'eri-
can Federation of Labor, and de-
clare that one Of the Burns detectives.
who had been in attendance at every
session of the trial. had sought TO
reach the ears OF juror with ie-
marks made while seated In the Sec
ton occupied by members OF the
press. The latter charge caused a
half hours recess for the purpose II
Investigating, at the conclusion of
which the detective was exoneratsd
by Rogers in open court.
Rogers denunciation OF Burns grew
out of continual objections by the
prosecution to the plying of Franklin
with questions concerning his nego-
tiations with the district attorney. He
had asked the witness II he had not,
l after making his confession, In which
the names of Burns and Gompers
were used. been told to bring Com
pers name into his testimony when
ever the opportunity arose.
The district attorney insisted that
Burns had nothing to do with the
prosecution and that no one sought
| to implicate Gompers In the Darrow
/ trial.
Burns men are concerned In every
detail of this case" retorted Roge's;
"even to bounding our witnesses and
watching our office and dictagraph-
, ing our offices. No man could truth.
fully deny that william J. Burns
men, employed by the National Erec-
tors association. were not behind this
case in every particular
District Attorney Fredericks said
that no one had sought to implicate
Gompers in the present case. state
ment which brought Rogers again to
his feet.
at is a matter OF common knowl-
edge" he declared dramatically. that
the United States In this district.
through Oscar Lawler. and In other
districts, has made a strenuous effort
TO connect Mr.. Gompers and to bring
his name in, and IL is a matter OF
common knowledge right from the
evidence in this case. that the federal
grand jury at Indianapolis sent for
this check book; II came into this court
from indianapolis. where they are In
vestigating these other charges. II
is our contention that this prosecu-
ton against Darrow is but step
against Gompers. Mr.. Burns is an
nouncing everywhere that he Is going
to get Gompers IL he can. through
Darrow."
The prosecution took vigorous ex-
ception 20 these uttersDces.
"If Burns has anything against Mr..
Gompers and Is following Mr.. Com
pers. that is his business. not ours.
| said District Attorney Fredericks.
4 I'VE have no charges TO prefer here
l against Mr.. Gompers In any way.
| shape or form. and II Mr.. Darrow.
as this witness has said. had not mem
| toned the name of Gompers and II
had not been brought out on cross
/! examination Of this witness. the name
OF Gompers would never have been
mentioned in this case
oscar LawIer Is the attorney
maybe the attorney. for the national
| government investigating something
| along his own line. and the lines may
! cross. and there may be Information
|! passed back and forth. hut there IL
4 -a....r.- - .fforf 20 draa any one