Evening star., 1926-11-26

L, loEl anu OcCSIllDSI IL,
1922, the date of the last contract.
Conspiracy Is Analysed.
Mr.. Hogan argued that when two
persons are charged with conspiracy
it is not possible to maintain that the
evidence of guilt or inEccenSe Of one
defendant has no effect on the others
standing.
If there was such q conspiracy as
the Government alleges, Hogan point
ed out, it started with the negotia-
ton in 1921 and terminated with the
award of the contract in 1922. Testi-
mony offered after that date, he de-
clared. was not admissible. The Gov
ernment, Mr.. Hogan declared, has
not proved that there was consplr-
acy, nor has it proved its charge
that the loan had been made to Fan
He protested that in offering its
evidence in the present trial, the Gov
ernment had jumped from the CON
tract to the purchase of talls fanch
in New Mexico and then desired 10
submit testimony that had peen gwen
before a Senate committee l3 months
afte, the loan was supposed to have
been made.
Lambert Begins Argument.
ITpon the conclusion Of Mr.. hogan $
argument Mr.. Lambert took the moor
before Justice Hoehling. lie pleaueu
with the court mot to allow the
iurv to come to a conclusion that
something has been proven whlcn
hasn't been. namely, a conspiracy.
He detailed briefly what the Govern
ment had proved in relation to the
existence of leases, contracts to build
fuel tanks in Hawaii and the ranch
transaction of his client, and then ue-
clared that as far as the record In
the case is concerned the Senate OIL
committee had no authority TO take
testimony or command any person 10
appear before 1t, because its powers
had expired with the Congress which
died that session.
"If that were so, does that help
YOU any?" asked Justice Hoehling.
"If that were So" replied Mr.. Lam
bert, anything that happened before
that committee would be absolutely
inadmissible as evidence.
60 far as concerns the letter Fail
wrote to the committee, Lambert con-
tinued, it affects nothing in the case
except the question of a private mat
ter between Fall and another tndi-
vidual. The letter, he added, deals
solely with the private business Of Fall
and not Doheny.
How can that be held to be admis-
sible?" he asked, when the alleged
acts of conspiracy occurred between
July, 1921, and December, 1922. This
testimony ought not to have any
standing because it cannot be wiped
out in the iury's mind"
Levi Cooke of defense counsel then
addressed the bench for five minutes.
He asked the court this question:
How can statements Of Doheny be-
fore the committee not affect Fall?
How can the letter of Fall not affect
Doheny, yet neither has been proved
ever to have conspired with each
other? The Government brings in
these two statements hooked together
which it hopes to establish as con-
spiracy."
Upon Mr.. Cookies conclusion, JUS
tice Hoehling recessed court to formu-
late his decision
Court Takes Recess.
When court convened after luncheon
recess Mr. Roberts addressed the
bench briefly, saying he could not add
anything more to the Governments
stand with reference to Doheny's
statement before the committee Jan
uary "a He emphasized, however, that
when Mr.. Doheny asked to make q
statement "to the committee and the
public" he broadcast his remarks to
the entire world and certainly any
existing statutes could not be so con-
strued as to prevent only the court
from hearing them.
Just as he was about to sit down
he recalled references of defense
counsel to the order in which the
Governments case was being pre-
sented, which Mr.. Lambert dwelt on
briefly this morning in telling what
the Government had proved and CIV
ing the proofs in the order of their
occurrence. He explained to the
court that while 1t would not be diff
cult for a trained legal mind to un-
derstAnd the entire case, If presented
in order Of occurrence. nevertheless
the nature of 1t made it necessary
for the Government to take the al
legged acts of conspiracy in log1cal
order, which the jury. representing
an unframed legal mind, could grasp
easier.
Justice Hoehling then announced
that the questions involved in the mo-
tion are, II need not say, most I'M
portant," and he announced recess
until the return of the court, during
which he will reach q decision on the
matter. Just before he left the bench
he was literally .swamped with legal
hooks. papers and documents, when
counsel had used in their arguments.