The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1921-11-26
RULINGS IN ELECTION CASES
WILL CO To SUPREME COURT
CASE or CLAUDE ROGERS AND
BALLOTS TO BE LAID 26FoRB
STATES HIGHEST CoURT
JUDGE Ro8rNgoN TAXES IN1TrA-
TIVE OWING 70 CENSU2E OF
HrS DECISIONS

The West Virginia supreme court or
appeals will be asked to pass upon I'M
portant ruling made by Judge Alan II.
Robinson IN the Ohio county criminal
court. in tho election fraud cases against
CITY Manager Homer c. Crago and FOR
mer City Solicitor ]. J. Y. O'Brien.
Judge Robinson last evening certified
TO tho supreme court the record dealing
with the Claude Rogers matter IN the
case OF city Manager Crago. and atsor-
neys for tho state and defense were In
structed 10 prepare the record and GER
t!icats In the matter Of the ballots
offered by the state In evidence against
former CITY Solicitor OBrien.
Yesterday morning Judge Robinson
called Into court the attorneys Inter
ested IN the Crago and OBr!en cases
and told them that he proposed TO GER
tlsy the records OF his rulings In the
Rogers and ballot matters 10 the SUI
preme court since ne has been censored
rather freely for his rulings IN these
matters. Judge Robinson took occasion
TO say that IN making - csc rulings ne
acted conscientiously. and told attor-
nsys that he wants the supreme court
IL say whether or not he erred IN his
rulings.
The Rogers Incident
Tho court hrst called in CRY Manager
Homer Q SraSo and attorneys for state
and defense In the CTaGo case and took
up the matter OF the courts rulings IN
the case OF Claude Rogers. who tolo
the court ne would not testify in Mr..
CragoS case.
The court directed that the record
should show. first. that in the matter OF
Claude ROGERS, Hon. John J. Comm. In
the case Of City Manager Crago, asked
tho court whether n jury would Dc
called and held. locked up. until Mr.
Rogers agreed testify. and that the
court stated that in view OF the expense
and the fact that three weeks In jail
for refusal TO testify in the Thomp-
son trial hal not caused Mr.. Rogers TO
change his mind, the court ruled that
he could not do as the states attorneys
asked. The court directed that the GER
tihcate to the supreme court show that
Mr.. CouiH asked what disposition The
court was ready to make OF Rogers's
care, and the court replied that no jury
had been sworn and the state was not
in position 10 take testimony at the
time, and that therefore there was no
action the court could take to punish
Mr.. Rogers.
The Ballots
On the question OF Judge Robinson's
refusal to permit the jury 70 see the
N~Vots in the trial OF ]. ]. +. O'Brien.
was agreed lEl1l THO SupACiAc SOtA =
NOT. only should be asked 20 say whether
Judge Robinson erred IN ruling that tho
ballots should not be admitted IN evil
dence but as well whether the court
erred in ruling that oral evidence, de-
scriptivc Of the ballots which the jury
was not permitted to see, could 10 intro
duced by the state.
In the Claude Rogers matter, several
hours was taken up with argument on
the stato'S contention that the complete
record OF the examination OF Claude
RoSSs in which he said he would not
testify Il called to do so In tho Crago
case should be included with the certih-
cato to the supreme court. Cragos coun-
SET 9nally agreed TO allow this tran
script 10 accompany the certificate. with
the understanding that IL such step Is
improper. the mistake is that OF the
states attorneys.
Discussion developed the fact that II
Is expected that further trials in cleo
tion fraud cases win be held up pend
Ing the supreme courts ruling on Judge
Robinscn'S decisions in the matters GER
titled 70 the supreme court. These de-
cisions are not expected earlier than the
January term OF the supreme court II
then
It lE also probable that tho supreme
court will also be asked TO PASS on IN
dictments IN one each OF cases typical
ct all prosecutions attempted by the
state In the election cases.