The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1913-01-09


"Q.-I you did state to any of
these gentlemen contained in this
agreement of facts that you con-
trolled the Capital News and were
running it for what there was in
it for you, then you were telling
them what wasn't trueY
Alt was a political stunt.
"Q.-WhatY
ga political stunt.
"Q.-What do you mean by a
political stunt,
"A.-Well, | was just getting
all the water on my wheel l could
on my side.
"Q.-Will you explain what
you mean by getting water on
your. wheel?
Al wanted to get all the
votes l could for the crowd | was
for.
"Q.-If you made that statement
was it true or falseq
"A.-It was political state
ment.
"Q.-You won't say on oath
it wasn't true, when you made
that statements
"A.-Of course, | realize how
this is, as | say: of course-you
know with politics, if you tell
everything you know, you would
be in weak position; you might
put it down | didn t tell the truth.
Well, if l made that
statement-and 1 did make it, for
| have no recollection of that
statement; they were on the other
side.
"Q.-Answer my question.
CAL don't remember ever
talking to them, although l
might; you see
"Mr. Fraser-'If you made the
statement, was it true or false9'
"A.-Why, it wasn't true; it
was just politics.
Cruzen Not Guilty.
"Broxon testifies that he wrote
: the articles and that they were
not dictated or inspired by Cruz
en-, and that he did not take in
structions or receive directions il
any matter from Cruzen. Cruzer
denies that he ever saw the ar
l ticles or knew anything Of then
until after they were published
! and he saw them in the paper. Ii
this state of evidence, we are
l obliged to either believe the state
t ments and representations hi
4 made during a political campaign
: and disbelieve his testimony, els'
g take the evidence here given un
t der oath and assume that he wa
: making false statements and rep
r reservations during the campaign
: in order to further and advance
the claims and interests of a polit
zeal organization, Of which he wa
:, a leading spirit. In cases of thi
y kind, the evidence should be clea
h and convincing in order to justif.
l. a court in Furnishing for contemp
3 / can not think the evidence pro
:, duced makes d case against Cruz
t, en-. 1t is not shown by the proof
l. that he owns an interest in tn
t. paper or controls its policy in an
n matter or that he inspired the al
e ticles in question or knew of thel
e prior to their appearance in tn
d paper / therefore dissent froI
IS the conclusion Of my associates
d finding Cruzen guilty of COZ
d tempt.
L Publishers Guilty of Contempt.
n AS to the defendants Sherida
L and BroXon, the evidence show
lie tnat tney nave ONefSlepped III
ID bounds of the law in 50 far {
f. they charged the court in pent
NJ ing case with corruption and cril
lie inal motives in hearing and d
re Gliding the case. In this they cle'
10 ly passed beyond the constitution
81 al right of free speech and a fire.
n press. On the other had, | do M
think there was any contempt {
infraction of the law in publis
s. ing the news and press dispatc
or es and criticising the court
is any of its judges or taking issl
he with the court in it's reasoning
he conclusions.
le- Penalty Too Severe.
ac fSThic hripnc mo tO aonSIHG