Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-10-27
REQUIREMENT
OF PROOF MET
BY WILMETH
Judge M0ll Denies
Hartman's Peremp-
tory Demand.
HEARS EVIDENCE
Ruling on Motion Not
Indication of Final
Outcome.

Holding that Delbert o. Wilmeth,
who claims to be the Republican
nominee for the city judgeship by
virtue Of a certificate Of appoint
ment issued by the chairman of the
city central committee, had not only
met the requirement of proof as an
intervenOr In the mandamus proceed
ings brought by J. Herbert Hartman,
but had rather convincingly" met
the requirements Of making a prima
facia case, Judge T. J. Moll of Su-
perior Court, Room 5, today over
ruled motion in HaTtmans behalf
asking that the court render a per-
emptory decision on Hartman's mo-
ton asking that mandate be issued
compelling the commissioners to
place his name on the ballot.
The court warned that his action on
this motion does not indicate how the
court will rule at the conclusion of all
the evidence
The action Of Judge Mon compelled
Mr.. Hartman to introduce witnesses in
his behalf and when court reconvened
this afternoon, witnesses for Hartman
were placed on the stand
PEREMPTORY
RULING DENIED.
Attorney Felt for Hartman at the close
OF the Introduction Of evidence on the
part of Wilmeth, introduced a motion
asking that the court give a peremptory
ba
failed to produce evidence of sufficient
weight to force Hartman to tender evl-
dence.
Judge Mol, in .uung on the motion,
said; I'm motion FOR peremptory find
Ing or verdict, the rule, OF course, is that,
If there Is any evidence tending to cup
port .the contention Of the other side, or
In other words, If there is any evidence
against the movement. then the motion
for peremptory finding is not well taken.
1T seems to me IN this case at this
stage the interveuOr has not only met
the requirements, which counsel and not
the court imposed upon the relater to
prove, has not only bean prima facie dis
charged, but rather cOnvincingly met
"Tbe decision of the conrt will not be
reached until all evidence has been in
troduced. The motion for q peremptory
finding is not well taken and will be
overruled."
HARTMAN FORCED
TO PRESENT EVIDENCE.
This action Of Judge Mon forced Hart
man to present evidence
The first witness TO be presented in
behalf Of Hartman, was W alter K. Beard,
2321 Broadway, a retail furniture dealer,
who testified that Hartman bought about
81, 800 worth Of furniture and other house
hold goods from his store. He stated
that he has in the past extended credit
to Hartman. He testified that Hartman's
reputation for honesty and morality was
good" and would remain that way to
him until Hartman was found guilty
The second witness was William NJ
Fogarty, president of the Fidelity Trust
Company, who testified that he had
known Hartman for eight or nine years
and considered his reputation for hon
esty as good" On cross examination. /
he admitted that since Hartman was in
dicted in the courts that the reputation
has not been so good.
Horace Hewitt, vice president Of the
North Indianapolis Cradle Works and /
formerly connected with the Premier
Motor Company, testified that Hartman
years ago acted IN the capacity Of book
keeper and cashier for the Premier Com
pany and that Hartman's reputation for (
honesty was good. On cross examination, /
he stated that he did not know what
effect printed reports concerning Hart |
mans indictments had on public opin- ,
ion.
CITY CLERK
TELLS OF VOTE.
George HutselI. city clerk testified that .
the records of the primary In the Four I,
teenth precinct of the Ninth ward showed /
that only twelve people voted on pri- |
mary day. This evidence was TO refute |
the testimony Of Ed Ebaugh, who tes-
tilted in Wilmeth's behalf, that he was
engaged by Hartman for S5 to work /
for Hartman. Ebaugh testified that he !
helped to get out the 1,4OO votes in that /
precinct.
Perry Howard. who lives In the Third |
precinct OF the Sixteenth ward, testified !
that he knew the late Richard Lamar !
and on primary day saw Lamar and /
(Contlnued on Page EIeven.)