The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-08-21


| to Reno for immoral purposes. and on
the sixth charging the same offense,
with respect to Lola Norris, tney OBJ
stinately disagreed
With reference to Marsha Warning
ton the vote stood seven for acquittal
and five for conviction for the nine con-
secutive ballots.
With reference to Lola Norris the
vote stood 10 for conviction and for
acquittal, likewise for the nine con-
secutive ballots.
Sentence will be pronounced on Tues
day, September 3 Judge Van Fleet set
the bail at $4,000 on each count, making
100000 in all
l. p. Diggs, the defendants father.
and Marshall Diggs, his uncle. both
were ready with bonds in the amount
named. and United States Commissioner
Krull was ready to accept them to-
night.
Counsel for the defense announced
that they would appeal to the highest
court in the land. and asked for 10 days
in which to petition for a writ of error
to the United States circuit court Of
appeals.
San Francisco, August 20.--The case of
the government against Maury l. Diggs,
former state architect of California. went
to the jury late today with no attempt
by the defense to prove that Diggs did
not transport Marsha Warrington across
the state line from Sacramento, Cal. to
Reno. New, or that they did not live there
for three days as husband and wife.
These acts, it was admitted had been
committed, but they did not constitute a
violation of the Mann white slave traffic
act because they had not been done with
criminal intent. The trip to Reno had
been half an accident. If Diggs and
Marsha Warrington with F. Drew Cami-
retti and Lola Norris. their companions,
hstd not missed an earlier train they would
have remained within the state and
though their offense against morality
would have been the same they would
not have transgressed a federal statute.
Admitted Facts
This defendant asserted the govern
ment prosecutor, did not deny on the
stand the truth of the essential facts we
have shown here. He had TO admit them
all. The defendant in a criminal case
usually relies on the presumption of his
| innocence, but this defendant relies ON his
own depravity and licentiousness."
| In seeking to establish that the trip
was not premeditated and that the two
girls had not been induced to take it by
threats of scandal on one hand and prom
ises of marriage on the other, Diggs will
| ingly testified to his own misconduct and
the embarassments, domestic and busi-
! ness, into which it had led him.
His counsel in summing up the evidence
did not palliate these acts.
Asks for Motive
Paint this defendant as you villa
II onster if you please, argued Robert
| Devlin, his senior counsel, but tell me
what motive he would have had in going
out of the state for the purpose of ac-
complishing those things already accom-
plished.
Counsel may characterize him as they
please and | may not differ with them.
They say his act was shameless and 1
! may feel the same way about it, but it
lis not white slavery"
| This was the whole argumentative SUBJ
stance of the defense There remained
] the rhetorical and the emotional appeals
and. of course, they We're not neglected.
The girls were blamed for tempting the
| men They We're called willing accom-
rlices in what evil had been done and the
wisdom of trusting a woman loved and
sccrned when she bears witness against
the lover who has discarded her was
called into question.
Evidence Before Jury
THE evidence is all before you.s con-
| cluded the court "and it is for you to
say whether the truth rests. The. defend
ant has taken the stand in his own behalf,
and so far as his testimnny tends to
cover the transaction involved in the
charges against him it is somewhat at va
rance with that of the two girls
The testimony of the defendant how
ever, does not cover the entire transact
tion. After testifying to the relations be-
tween himself and Caminetti and these
girls down to the Sunday night on which
the evidence of the government tends to
show the trip to Reno was taken, he
stopped short and has given none of the
incidents of that trip, contenting himself
with merely referring to it as having been
taken. This was the defendants privilege,
but in passing upon the evidence you have
a right to take this omission of the de-
fendant into consideration, since it is the
| legitimate Inference that, could he have
explained the discriminating evidence
against him, he would have done so.
Questions of Intent
IF you find these girls were taken to
Reno by the defendant in the manner
charged, then the only question remain-
ing is as to the intent with which they
We're so taken. There Is a homely adage
that actions speak louder than words,
and the truth of this is quite as
| applicable to judicial inquiries as in the
ordinary affairs of life
! And even if you find that the de-