The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1913-06-04
Blackmail Alleged by Law
yer for Atteaux in the
Dynamite Case
WOOD CANNOT OFFER
ANY MORE DEFENSE
Because His Attorney Asked
for Judgment When the
State Rested

erick +. Atteaux, the dye manufacturer
in the dynamite conspiracy trial allege,
that the defendant was the victim ol
attempted backmail by John j. Breen
who has confessed to planting dynamite
at Lawrence during the textile strike
in 1912. Atteaux took the stand in his
own defense to-day.
President William NJ Wood Of the
American Woolen Co., who was charged
with Atteaux and Dennis j. Collins with
being concerned in the alleged conspir-
Iacy, was without further opportunity
to present his defense under the laws
of the state. After the prosecution had
rested, Attorney Hurlburt moved that
the case against his client, Wood, be
dismissed, thus restipg the case. When
Judge Crosby ruled adversely it left only
the Atteaux defense to be heard Col
Inns having taken the stand and con-
fessed to his part in placing the explo-
sive on the premises of Lawrence strik-
ers.
In outlining the defense. Attorney
Coakley for Atteaux said the defense
would show that Breen tried to get Sl3,-
900 from Atteauy to settle the dynamite
suits and, failing, resorted to black
mail.
Before calling Atteaux, the defense
several other witnesses who
told Of chauffeur Pira, government
witness, having discussed the testimony
previous to appearing One witness said
Pira told him he didn't remember much
about the trip on Jan. 10. 1912, but they
knew all about it at the district attor-
ney's office. Other witnesses told Of
the movements of Breen in Lawrence.
The defendant, Atteaux, told of his
activity in endeayoring to bring about
4 settlement OF the strike, He said he
talked with members Of the union and
told them that he represented the Amer
can Woolen Co. in measure but also
himself, because if the mills |
,losed down his business would suffer
The Argument For Wood.
In Atty. HurIburt's argument to have
he case taken from the jury so far az
Wood was concerned, he said
"The charge against the defendant |
Wood III this case is that he entered /
nto an unlawful agreement with At. |
eanx and others to plant dynamite in
lawrence. 1t is, therefore, incumbent |
Ipon the commonwealth to prove that |
e took active participation in the con-
piracy during the time of the alleged |
onspiracy. 1t is not sufficient to show
merely passive knowledge OF or ac-
uiescenee in the conspiracy. Unless
hey show that he actively participated
\ the conspiracy he is not guilty.
Therefore, the commonwealth must
how that Wood did not take an active
art in this agreement, if there was
ueh an agreement. From the govern
lent's evidence it appears that the
is alleged to have begun at
| 30 o'clock on Jan. 10, and that this
ian Breen and Atteaux entered to it.
is clear under the evidence and the
allotment, that this so-caled agreement
Isted about "a hours, dynamite plant
lg and ALL At the meeting on Jan. 10. !,
atween Breen and Atteaux. Mr. Wood !
as not present and nothing was said, \
,cording to the evidence, connecting Mr.. 4
1ood in any way"
He went on to say that while Pitman /.
light have been in contact with Mr.. !,
'ood. more or less through business as.
'ciations, no evidence had been offered
show that the two men saw or com
unicated with one another during the II
legged conspiracy.
Dist. Atty. Pelletier said. in opening G
s argument on the motion to dismiss o
e case against Wood that he had not le
pected to have to argue the case three >
mes, as he might have to now. He o
oted Massachusetts, decisions tending II
show, he argued, that all persons con- o.
rned in conspiracy, whether they
me together or not, might be guilty. =,
81 suppose we may in all modesty
esume that there has been prima facie y
idence of a conspiracy OF some kind C
re. The conspiracy must be estab- :,
he'd by facts, of course. II is for the
ry to draw the inference. | under a.
and il is not for the court to draw a u
vorable or unfavorable inference from
e evidence presented. -
There cannot be any question in this =
Sc but that the defendant Wood had y
interest in the planting of this dyna- o.
te. The drafting of that letter was
attempt to influence public opinion.
e jury has the right to decide II put.
e letter in the newspapers is the =
Il Way 10 reach the oupratives