Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1914-11-17

Spouse OF the witness to interrogation
les were Il can't remember" or 81
can't answer tina: question
c Z. Dietz and G. a. Shallberg for
the defense fought the introduction OF
the testimony of Sheriff Bruner with
all the power at their command, claim
ing that the state was merely attempt
ing 10 impeach its own witness and
that no proper foundation for any such
proceeding had been laid.
Attorneys Clash.
AS soon as Judge Olmsted announced
his ruling on the question of immunity
Attorney Shallberg declared the order
should be entered in the presence of
the jury. which had been out OF the
court room during the argument OF
counsel.
You might as well have had the ar
gument given before the jury" re-
tor;ed Attorney Wood.
Il supposed you had attended to all
that was the sharp reply of Attor-
ney Shallberg.
At this point Sheriff Bruner took
the witness stand and Attorney Dietz
suggested that the witness ought 10 be
advised Wy the court that the charge
Of Partially in Office. grounds for re-
moval from his official position, might
be made against him If he complied
with the courts order and testified,
or that he should refuse to testify
and stand on his constitutional rights.
"Can Thew Remove Me7u
DO you represent the witness?' in
quired Attorney Wood.
NO. ] was merely attempting to
give the witness some information.
since he was not in the room while
the discussion was on. have not
been attempting to defeat the ends OF
justice as you have" shot Attorney
Dietz across the table, while Judge
Olmsted was ordering Coroner Meyer
to bring in the jury.
The court then turned to the wit
ness and explained his ruling relative
to immunity and stated that he would
pass separately On each question
asked him.
Judge. what do they mean by say
ing they can take my Office away from
] 1 y
and I want to know. Am l liable to
lose my office? l don't want to jeop-
ardize my Office by anything ! say
from the witness stand"
Should Have Counsel.
If the witness desires counsel, he
certainly should have it," urged At
torney Dietz.
Il think the witness has been ably
responded the court.
Il beg to differ with the court" re-
turned the lawyer for the defense.
-ernoon." and while the attorney was
still talking. Judge Olmsted began
reading his immunity order TO the
court
Attorney Dietz made formal objec-
tica to the ruling, which was over
ruled, and then Attorney Wood began
where he left of Saturday morning.
Did Adolph Vanderbeke ever pay
YOU any money that came from East
Moline saloon keepers for protec-
.ion?'' he asked the witness.
Attorney Dietz renewed his objec-
ions to the question, stating IL was
eading and suggestive and that it was
not binding on either of the defend
ants and did not tend to support the
of the indictment. But the
court overruled the objection and or
Tered the witness TO answer.
Court Reassures Bruner.
= want TO know if my office is in
LANCER OF being taken away from me, |
Z l answer" insisted the sheriff.
The court has said that he will see
hat you are protected and you cannot
,e removed from office ON testimony 1
-ou give at the direction of the court"
.eassured Judge Olmsted. Answer
he question
II can't answer that" finally said /