Weekly journal-miner. [volume] (Prescott, Ariz.) 1908-1929, 1914-06-24

torney's Office since Clark was ar
rested the conjecture over what
Clark's line Of defense would prob
ably be, the personnel Of the wit
ness array and the realization that
a graft hearing was on tap. all COM
bined to attract and as 4 result the
proportions OF the crowd were
equally as great as the one which
thronged the Superior Court room
to hear the prize fight preliminary
hearings Of several months ago
when for the first time in the his
tory Of the court room, the crowd
beyond control, burst into applause
at various intervals when counsel
for both sides engaged in brilliant
tits and sparks flew from the clash
Of their rapiers of wit.
But the scene yesterday morning
was far different Instead OF spirit
ed debate by counsel there was just
the sing-song motion OF arising ana
sitting down again. Of the counsel
for the defense making a motion
and Of the presiding magistrate ov-
er-ruling it and ordering the pro-
ceedings 10 continue Instead of
the large crowd divided into two
factions, cheering. roofing and hop
ing for their cause, there was mere
ly 4 crowd of the curious and wit
nesses. No one, apparently, had
any cause at stake. No one was
there for any other purpose than
to submit its testimony, some SEN
satiOnal paragraphs would unques
tiOnably have been available today.
The hearing commenced at 10:l5
o'clock The defendant was seated
between Attorney ]. Ralph Tascher
and Attorney Richard Lamson, the
junior members of the two local
legal law firms of Anderson and
Lamson and Clark and Tascher. re-
taincd for his cause. Both of the
senior members OF the firms are
away az the present time on bust
ness. County Attorney p. w. O'Sul-
Ivan and Assistant County Attor-
ney Joseph II. Morgan appeared
for the State
The County Attorney arose and
reading from the FIRST complaint in
his hand. he cited the case of the
State OF Arizona VS.. D. NJ Clark
for issuing a fraudulent claim upon
the county to Jeff Claghorn, a
cook employed by Clark in his pri-
vate enterprise. boarding house
conducted in connection with the
county's road work The amount
of the claim was fs~--S6o>-G 1aS-
horn was paid the money by the
county through Clark.
-Claghorn was called to the stand
by the county attorney but Attor-
ney Tascher arose before he reach
cd there and declared he would
waive the preliminary examination
upon this charge. This move was
probably taken to test the pulse
of the prosecution, it being con-
sidered possible that the county at
torney might then discontinue the
hearing on the other charges and
enter the Superior Court session. his
energy based on the prosecution
of this one.
An instant later, however. the
county attorneys position was made
clear when he moved the submit
ting of testimony in the State OF
Arizona VS.. d. NJ. Clark for issuing
4 fraudulent claim upon the county
to Jeff Clabgorn for $4S This was
listed as the second of the eight
complaints.
Tascher moved that this COM
plant be dismissed and the defen-
dant's bond be exonerated upon the
ground that no complaint was be-
fore the court upon which a pre-
Iiminary examination could be held
that the court had no jurisdiction
to listen and to form his or her
own conclusions.
But is was Il surprise to the coun-
ty attorney and other close follow
ers OF the case to note the ease
with which the defense surrender
I'd its rights to hear what the pros
ecution had to offer Followers Of
he law believe that the defense
ook this action in order to gain
some valuable technical advantage
when the big test comes off before
lie Superior Court
The witnesses were all there.
Combined effort by the county at
orney and the sheriff resulted in a
vide cleanup around the county
nd witnesses were present from
Every man and woman
vh0 vuos I-nOvvr 70 0Oeeaes -1