Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-05-07
ANDERSON SAYS
TALK TO JURORS
MILNE OF DUTY
Not Prejudicial, He States, in
Overruling Coal Mems Plea
in Abatement.
STATEMENT CORRECTED

Judge A. B. Anderson in federal
court today defended his instructions
to the special grand jury that re-
turned an indictment against 125
coal operators and miners, holding
4kA his statements were not preju-
dicial against John L. Lewis, acting
president of the United Mine Work
ers of America, nor to any other de-
fendant, and overruled plea in
abatement filed on behalf of the de-
PENDANTS yesterday by Charles Evans
Hughes, chief counsel for the de-
fense.
A similar plea in abatement filed
on behalf os coal operators was like
wise overruled.
An answer to the plea was fled by
Dan W. Sims and L. Ert Slack, special
assistant district attorneys in charge Of
the prosecution, in which it was held
that the instructions given by Judge An
derson were not prejudicial.
FURTHER STATES
ERROR CORRECTED.
In replication to the plea it was held
that the plea in abatement was INSULT
cient and it was further stated that the
instructions were not only in accord
ance with the duty of the court, but that
an erroneous statement made by the court
lad been corrected before the grand jury
by counsel conducting the investigation.
Pleas in abatement filed yesterday were
based on a statement by Judge Anderson
referring TO a speech made in congress
purporting TO quote John l. Lewis. the
quotation afterward being found incor-
rect.
In presenting argument supporting the
governments answer, Mr.. Simms cited q
similar case taken to the court of appeals
IN New York, in which instructions given
a grand jury naming certain persons
and supported by affidavits was held 20
be regular and within the duty Of the
court
After the governments answer to the
two pleas in abatement was presented.
Mr.. Hughes. in behalf Of the defense
moved TO strike out the answer on the
ground that it was improper and not suf-
s.scient at law.
Se then took un each paragraph of
the answer. moving that they be stricken
out for the reasons that they were ir-
revalent. tmmaterial. had no hearing on
the Issue and We're not sufficient at
law.
~ regard to a paragraph in which It
was said that the erroneous statement
made by the court had been corrected
70 the grand jury. Mr.. Hughes qnes-
TONED Mr.. Simms as to how this infor
nation was impaired 10 the jury
ait. Simms said the attorneys han
ding tie prosecution gave she informa-
tioh to the jury. but admitted that they
had not been placed under oath or had
not appeared as Witnesses.
Mr.. Hughes then maintained that tho
statements of prosecutor before the
jury could neither Withdraw nor modify
the Instructions Of the court and ex-
pressed an opinion that IN order prop-
erly to correct the error. the jury should
have been called before the court and
informed IS TO the veracity Of the state
ment purported to have been made by
Air. Lewis.
All motions to strike out the answer
or any part thereof were Overruied by
the court
EXHAUSTIVE REVIEW
MADE IN RULING.
esige Anderson. In ruling on the pleas
~ abatement. reviewed both the in
instructions and authorities cited.
He held that his Instructions were not
prejudiciai and agreed with Mr.. Simms'
Interpretation Of a New York case quoted
''The embarrassment TO the court is
much greater than it can he to any of
the attorneys or defendants" said Judge
Anderson in commenting on his ruling.
for the court is now to pass on n charge
made against himself
'"rhe charges made are, in effect. that
] overawed and overpowered the grand
jury and wrested from It indictments in
some cases. while, If left untrammeled
and free, II would not have returned such
indictments.
4 have no prejudice against these men.
Il do not even know them, and to say
that I have any iIl-wi1l or enmity toward
any of them is silly
The court then maintained that the
quotation referred TO rather than pref
CONTINUED on Page Seven)