The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1923-05-04

Hence, the evidence would have been
proper enough in making out a case
In chief; but We think no reversible
error WIS committed in receiving
the same rebuttal of the testimony,
given by each defendant. that they
never knew Of any immoral prac
tees on the part OF Maxine in the
room until the first week in Novem
Der. Evidence proper in chief may
be permitted in rebuttal. in the dis.
erection of the court. State V. Can
tieny "a MINI. l; MINI & Oak Cat
tie Co. v. Chicago G. Northwestern
Ry. Co. los MINI. 40.
There is claim Of misconduct
on the part Of the county attorney
grounded principally on the offer Of
The claim is without merit.
The contention also is made that
the trial court unduly restricted
counsers argument, and erred in the
instructions to the jury. We are not
persuaded that there was error in
either respect. II is evident that the
only part of the argument OF coun
sci which the court intended to eau
ton the jury against was the sug-
gestion that the owners Of the pre-
misses occupied by defendants were
interested in the result. This was
matter given no attention in the
evidence. having no bearing upon
defendants guilt or innocense. and
furnishing no proper basis for an
argument 10 the jurr. The charge
appears full and clear. And there
was no substantial departure from
experience and correct legal prin-
ciples in this statement to which ex-
&c 90 "0nn NJ tho
for determining the credibility of a
witness is his interest in the result
of the case. AS q general rule VT
ness who is interested in the result
OF a suit viii not be as candid and
fair in his testimony as one who is
not so interested. but the degree OF
credibility 20 be given 10 each and TO
all OF the witnesses in the case are
questions for the jury alone in view
OF all the evidence in the case"
NO other assignment OF error
seems TO US to require discussion.
They have all been examined.
1.-The order is affirmed"
The opinion was written by Just
ice Holt.
History of Case
Edward B. Troskey and Herman
Splett first came into the limelight OF
1922. when a raid was made by the
police and federal agents on their
soft drink parlor Both men were
placed under arrest on the charge OF
having in their possession intoxicat
ing liquor for sale. They fought the
case, but Troskey was found guilty
and was sentenced by Judge Hiram
S. Golf TO pay fine of S11S.65. Later
Splett pleaded guilty to the charge
and was sentenced to. pay fine OF
$685.. Later the members of the
city council revoked the soft drink
license of the defendants. and their
place of business at Il5 North Front
street was closed.
+ 1t was following the above that
Mankato police started investiga
tions on the charge of Troskey L.
Splett having shared in the earn
ings of prostitute, one Maxine
Williams, who appeared as the
principal witness for the state
against the two men. Troskey Il
Splett were arrested by the Manka-
to police on that charge and ar
raigned before Judge Hiram S. Golf
who bound the men oyer to await
the action of the grand jury at the
June term of the Blue Earth county
district court in 1922. That body
indicted the two men. and subse
quently they were found guilty by
a jury in the district court before
Judge w. l.. Comstock, who sen
fenced each to three years at hard
labor in the states prison at Still
water.
The defendants through their at
torneys. Regan & Grogan and c. j
Laurisch of this city. appealed the
case to the supreme court, but that
body affirmed the decision of Judge
W. L. Comstock in the lower court
Bench warrants were issued to-
day out of the district court for the
imm ediate apprehension Of the two
-, o., h., CAar;ff Ed~ord hr;n