American Falls press. [volume] (American Falls, Idaho) 1907-1937, 1918-07-30
VOLUME XVIII.
pISBARMENT CASE HEARING
TAKING ON MORE SPEED
Prosecution Nearing Close OF Its Evil
dence. and Defense viii Soon Begin
the Introduction of Testimony.

stepped on in the O. X. Baum dlSDar-
ment proceedings, and the prosecu-
tons evidence is being rapidly put
on. The probabilities are that the
prosecution will practically finish to-
day great amount of testimony has
been taken and a large number of let
ters and instruments have been intro
duced. Objection has been made to
many OF them as having no bearing
on the case, and these may be ruled
out before the case comes to an end.
Saturday what is known as the Hod-
gin charge was heard. The allegation
was that Hodgin employed Baum to
draw a deed for a piece of land near
Rockland, and that Baum acted as his
attorney throughout the transaction.
Involved in the matter was a certain
check for 5000, given by Hodgin to
Baum to apply on the purchase of the
land and by Baum turned over to the
trustees of the estate selling the land.
One of the allegations was that Baum
turned over the check to the trustees
after receiving notice not to do so;
another was that he committed forgery
by changing the figures on the check
from 5000 to $8S9.99.
Hodgin testified that Baum was his
attorney. employed to draw the deed,
and acted for him throughout, and al
so that he turned the check over after
having been instructed not to do so.
On cross examination Hodgin ad-
nitted that he had placed the deed
on record and was in undisputed pos
session of the property when the order
not to turn the check over was given;
admitted that his account at the bank
lacked $1001 of being sufficient to
cover the check, and that he had been
requested to make up this amount to
cover the check and that he had not
paid Baum for preparing deed.
Levi Southwell who as administra-
tor had sold the land to Hodgin, said
the title to the land was in his bonds
men. ". T. Oliver, w. A. West, and
William Southwell; that he, as admin
istrator, had not paid Baum for SER
vices in connection with the transfer,
but that he understood payment was
made by Mr.. Oliver.
The next case was a complicated
one. involving several transactions.
The Union Iron works obtained
Judgment against Conrad Kissler for
about s1.1O0. Kissler obtained judg-
ment against j. H. Moss of Rockland'
for about $780, Baum, acting as at
torney for the Union Iron works, in
seeking to collect the judgment against
Kissler had attached or garnansheed
the Judgment against Moss in favor OF
Kissler. Some time after service OF
the garnishment on Moss Mrs. klssleT
began suit against her husband, Con-
rad Kissler, claiming ownership ol
the judgment against Moss. botn
these cases went to the supreme court
and were passed on by it. In the
meantime Baum had procured checB
from Moss in satisfaction of the
garnishment, and later had accepted
a note for the amount of the check IL
lieu thereof. Attorneys for Baum ad
mitted in their answer everything sus-
tanned by the evidence presented. The
merits of the charges will be testec
when the evidence of the defense is pu
in.
The charge in the J. c. Kuhn coun
was that Baum had appropriated S27'
collected by him for Kuhn. KUN
testified that the checks were ISSUED
to him and by him cashed, and tina
Baum never handled any of this mon
ey.
In what is known as the G. M. Adam
charge of intimidation. Adam testi
fed that an affidavit made by hin
charging Baum with attempted mt
midation. was not true; said he coul'
not understand English well, and tn
statements set forth in the aftldavi
we're not true.
In support of its contention that al
effort was being made, or had beel
made. by Baum. his agents or HI
friends. to influence witnesses, Tn
account of the trial as published Il
last Fridays Press, was read into tn
records. It was stated. by counsel TO
the prosecution. that it would b
shown that Baum was part owne
of the Press, and that he had write
or was responsible for the writing o
the account of the trial as printed i
A the Friday issue.
- On Tuesday morning o. n. BarOe
was placed on the stand in an al
tempt 10 sustain this contention. Ban
Der testified that he was the edito
and publisher of the Press; that BauI
did not now, and at no time IN IN
past. ever had been financially intel
ested in the Press; that Baum had nc
written the account of the trial, nc
suggested II, nor hnoMh any I'm
about il before its appearance. Bal
Der testified that he wrote it and wa
entirely responsible for all that al
peared.
An interesting diversion growing OF
of this matter was the placing of Mr.
Drake on the stand, to prove that tn
article in question affected Mrs. kel
cher. a synopsis of whose testimon
was given. Mrs. Drake had read II
article to Mrs. Kercher and said III
latter was made nervous by it, Mr.
Drake went further, and stated thi
Mrs. Kercher had said that assistaI
Attorney General Pope, who is II
ranking attorney for the prosecution
had advised her that she could colle'