The Connecticut labor news., 1923-04-06
Change of Venue Asked
(Continued from Page One.)

Mo-"
 Senator Joseph M. Tone gave cor roborative testimony as to the al legged remarks in Hartford of Mr. filling, and it was elicited from both witnesses that the Moyle letters were written before Schleifer came to this city.
 At the close of the evidence, Mr. Pickett expressed the desire of the state to add to the exhibit offered by MT. Slade containing the stenographic report of the remarks of MT. filling at the trial of Joseph Gagliardi and James Kennifek, the remarks made by Judge Wolfe, who presided at the trial, and these were admitted.
 We wish to make the record com plete," added Mr. Pickett MT. Slade has left off with the states attor- ney's remarks, and we wish to add the comments of Judge Wolfe.''
 The proceedings terminated at this point and as MT. Slade was engaged in the United States court he was excused. Judge Webb, however, who had throughout the hear ing, insisted on every means conducive to speed, said that he would remain in attend ance all day and that he would ex- pect to hear from MT. Slade directly the federal court rose.
 It is therefore possible that the arguments in the hearing may be taken this evening, of failing that, tomorrow morning.
 The text of the reply of the states attorney to the motion follows: ANSWER OF THE STATE OF
 CONNECTICUT TO DEFEND 1
 ANTS MOTION FOR A
 CHANGE OF VENUE.
 The following statements in said 1 motion/are denied:
 l. On Page I of the~-Motion, "be- fore said City Court of New Haven, the Hon. Arnon A. filling, as State Attorney for New Haven County, on or about February oth, 1925" etc, etc. and continuing through the alleged quotations on Page ?, ending. 'Instead they are being ham pered by a handful of men whose ideas are radical and not at all in accord with American citizenship"
 2. All of the paragraph on Page of said Motion beginning with the words, Said remarks were exten- sively published" and ending with the words, "carried full accounts of said remarks of the States Attor- ney."
 3. As to- the next paragraph on Page of said Motion, the States Attorney admits that he appeared in the City Court during a portion of the trial of the defendants case, ad- { mits that he has conferred with the l City Attorney from time to time in reference to the defendants case, and 1 denies that he assisted the City At { torney in the presentation of the case against the defendant in the City Court
 He admits furnishing the city attor- ney with photographic copies of al dence and which the defendant ad- mitted at the trial in the city court were his own letters. The states at : torney denies that he in any way in f tertered with the proceedings in the g city court r 4. As to the, paragraph on page ? [ of the motion, the. states attorney ( admits that he appeared before the t railroad committee of the legislature s in the general assembly at a public nearing. All the other items of said o are denied. il 5. The states attorney denies all o 't the items appearing in the last e paragraph on page and at the top 'f page of this motion. T. G. The paragraph on page of the notion, beginning with the words, Because of said observations on the r. ,art, etc, etc" and ending with words, Trial of said cause now before the ourt," IS denied In 7. As to the paragraph on page 3 W # the motion reading as follows: b Because of the acts aforesaid and tr he publication of said remarks of W
 AIEKXI IDDHTAxM1 IT