The Detroit times., 1914-09-23
|chreiter Can Repeat Early Con-
Fersation With Accused Alder
man Only as Rebuttal
Testimony
|OURT DECLARES FOR
RIGHTS OF ACCUSED
PM Not Be Subjected to Expert
ments, Says Opinion Sus-
tanning Defense

Judge Phelan, OF the recorders
|urt. ruled Wednesday morning, In
3 Gilman case that testimony from
Pddie" Schreiter. former clerk Of the
|mmon council committees, relating
conversations he had with Tom
Hnnan previous to July 8, bearing
ION the question Of the specific brib-
y charged In the case, and similar
fempts to obtain bribes in kindred
Sislation In reference to the Wa
|Bh railway, cannot be admitted as
Ft Of Schreiter's direct examina.
b.
(n making HIS ruling the Judge does
pass upon the direct applicability
the case which the prosecutor has
led to the case. II. however, affirm-
We testimony Is hereafter offered,
Sding to negative the witness Bren-
|h's testimony regard what took
zee between Gilman and Brennan
the Ford building ONCE on July 26
rtain questions having been asked
Sennan' on cross-examination with
buggestion that he placed the mon
jr the outside pocket Of Glinnan's
3t, the Judge will then hold that
breiter's testimony will be entirely
hpetent IN rebuttal. both as Inn
kching and as proper affirmative
timony, under the authorities, as
hing within the exception to the
Aeral rule covering the introduc-
i Of evidence.
The defense has now won two i'm
liant victories--the ruling out OF
kreiter's testimony, and the produc-
b IN court by the prosecutor Of the
ly reports made by Brennan dur
the progress Of the aldermanic
estigation. Both victories were
y after spirited fights In which the
secutor made every EFFORT to over
the defense.
udge Phelan's ruling excluding
|reiter's testimony, in part IL az
Ows:
response to the pfrsr Of the prose-
w by the direct examination OF the
ness schreiter. conversations be-
en Gilman and schreitsr previous
July .. bearing upon the question
~ and aimiiar attempts to obtain
bes In kindred municipal legislation
references TO the Wabash railway;
while not passing upon the direct
licability OF the. cases which the
Sai hso sold csG fs9 the @s present. Sss that
proposed testimony will not be
hitted az part OF this witness
reiter's main examination. ! am
IN this case establishing new pre-
bnts to aid In the conviction OF any
used person. The supreme court
been very careful In this case; 30
bfu1 that IL has taken away from
court the discretion the law ex-
ter carefuiiy examining the au-
ities submitted by the counsel up
the proposed offer by the prosecu-
OF the witness Schreiter. / am OF
opinion that such testimony 10 In
Aissible at this time:
will be recalled that there 10 no
kradictory testimony OF the witness
imam 90 far as to what In alleged
have taken place between the de-
liant Gilman and Brennan on the
rnoon Of July e. 1912: :,,s st Bren-
10 true that certain questions have
asked the witness Brennan on
DISCRIMINATION with suggestion
the witness Brennan himself
ed certain money In the Outside @
has been denied by Brennan. and
all not hesitate to charge the jury
IL there Ii no testimony contra
ory OF Brennan's as to what he
i6ed took place between the de-
liant and himself In the Ford build
on July 26.. the jury are not st
rty 60 speculate upon the subject
my subject where there In no evil
20 In the case to support; that II
money was paid by Brennan to
defendant II was the plain pur-
TO seal the alleged bribery con.
be ofrer of testimony to show what
defendant may have engaged in
s n. at the present time, mad
pible as immaterial and irrelevant,
believe clearly, within the rule
htbiting hearsay testimony. that II
ID be entirely subversive of the
10 OF evidence TO smirch and per-
ruin the reputation OF men who
strangers to this record. by gossip
bee for the person implicated 20
the accusation. Neither does the
that the defendants attorney
|hed upon part OF the subject
Be II either competent OF proper.
ions may not have their reputa-
blasted In this way, " ! nnderv sssv
q the rulings IN cases where tney
however, Affirmative testimony be
after offered tending 20 negative
witness Brennan's testimony upon
point, then / can see clearly tnat
Testimony would become entirely
pstent In rebuttsl, both ss I'm
hing and as proper a,armsoss snr,,,ns ss
me Gns wsitsin Il. 'sse.psion.