The Detroit times., 1913-07-11


law and m accordance with the risnts
Of respondent herein.
Becnusei the present panel or juror
now in tRis court were not seless,I
drawn and summoned as rvl"iI co ~
the laws Of this state ana IN hcc4i
ance with TIE rights OF respondent
herein -. -.
Before the motion against the jury
was made Glinnans attorney MADE
several motions for a continuance ana
one motion 20 quash the Indictment OF
TO materially change Il, but. all were
overruled by Judge Phelan, VINO IN
sisted that the case proceed Tie as
sertions against The jury however
could not bee overlooked and any cyl
dence that can be brought TO support
them will be heard
The attorneys for Gilman began
their DELAYING tactics al the very be
ginning OF the case When the clerk
began 10 call the jury, Attorney Nc
Namara arose and asked as matter
OF prOfessionl courtesy Tor another
dely OF one week The press OF other
legal business upon himself and Attor-
uev Hunt and the necessity FOR pre-
pairing additional proofs, were urged
as reasons.
The case has been pending since
September. said Judge Phelan. and
I'm not going 10 delay II again.
travelled all night 20 get here. The
court above has not seen ft 10 inter
fere All we can do is TO allow you
certain hours for beginning your work
In choosing jury and you can fix
those az your own convenience.
Attorney Mcnamara insisted upon
his continuance, but Judge Phelan re
fused 20 listen.
Attorney Hunt then nled a formal
motion yacating the order denying a
continuance because reasons shown
for continuance were sufficient. be
cause the prosecutor had been given
the right 10 change the information
without proper motions; because the
prosecutor conceded that continuance
should have been granted: because
Glinnans case was selected without
reason for first trial and because the
court announced he would not grant
a continuance before motions were
filed asking IT,
Another motion asked that the
names OF four witnesses, William Van
Dyke, Richard Lindsay. Charles A
Gadd and Max Koch. added 10 the In
formation by the prosecutor. be
stricken from the records.
Both motions were overruled.
Attorney Hunt then moved 10 Quasi
the "amended-amended" inforura ton
for the reason that the first inYorma
ton and all the amended informations
are detective, because preliminary
hearings were not properly given.
The new papers presented new mat
ter. the motion averred, and the pre-
liminary examination by which Clin.
nan was bound over was made void
by the alleging of new offenses. The
lnformations as they stand. said Mr.
Hunt, do not conform TO the constL
tutionaI rights OF the defendant. nor
10 the rules of procedure In this state
These may be called technical.
ties,' said Mr.. Hunt, "but every man,
no matter how guilty, has right TO
be tried under the law OF the land
We insist that We must be legally in.
formed of what he did TO be accused
of this serious offense."
'Ai. ohtpHclu uldue no answer 10
the motion TO quash, as the matter
had been gone over and settled when
the amendments were allowed.
The prosecutor has abandoned Sc
many positions that he seems to be
said Mr.. Hunt He pointed
out number of minor uncertainties
in the original information which al
legged that Gilman accepted 300 oil
Whereabouts" without stating whai
sort Of money 1t was Or whether Oh
not IL was of any value.
I'VE don't come in here with hinges
in our knees" he continued. but be.
cause We are representing an Ameri
can citizen accused Of a crime. The
has presented this case in
a lame, hating, totally and fatally de.
ficient manner. He has refused to
give the court any argument or help,
and we ask confidently that this in
be quashed by the courts
Independent Judgment"
Mr.. Shepherd explained the changes
In the information by saying that the
original papers alleged the accept
ance of a bribe' and the acceptance
of a promise OF bribe.' These were
alleged to be two crimes, and TO avoid
a chance of any mistake the second
was Withdrawn. He asked