The producers news. [volume] (Plentywood, Mont.) 1918-1937, 1935-12-13
LANCER Wins
Continued from page one,

Continued from page one)
inflamed or prejudiced you against
these defendants
MURPHY: That is objected tn
as incompetent; calling for a con-
clusion of the witness.
THE COURT: Sustained.
LANIER: You heard the entire
talk, did you, Mr.. Makiesky?
MAKIESKY: Yes, sir.
LANIER: Can you give in sub-
stance what Judge Miller did saw
to that jury?
Murphy Again Objects
MURPHY: That is objected to
as incompetent, immaterial: and
the very first question which was
objected to and the objection sus-
tanned by this court.
THE COURT: Yes, it is wholly
immaterial; sustained.
LANIER: Now if the court
please, we have at this time a
further matter we desire, and I
don't think it would be proper to
present it before the jury.
THE COURT: Is there any
further evidence we can proceed
with in the case, and take that up
during the noon hour?
LANIER: Until l get through
with this particular matter I
would say no.
THE COURT: Well. gentlemen
of the jury, in view of the state
ment of counsel that he has some
legal matter to present for the
consideration of the court which
should not be heard by the jury,
you will be excused until two
o'clock this afternoon.
Jury Excused
The jury was admonished bv the
court and retired from the court
room in charge of the bailiffs.
LANIER: May it please the
court, in my humble way | have
asked every question that l know
how to ask with regard to para
graph one set forth in the indict-
ment insofar as making it ma
terial to this lawsuit is concerned;
and if ! am wrong on that course
I would like to find out about it,
because the proof that | have to
offer, the other testimony that !
have to offer will be for the pur-
pose of elicting information to
questions that are very similar to
those which have been asked this
witness. Now of course if it is
true that these questions that |
have asked are held bv this court
to be questions that are improper
and subject to objections that have
been made to that particular para
graph, 1 take it that there is nc
question that could be asked.
Lanier Baked
THE COURT: Well, | am moi
trying your side of the lawsuit,
Mr.. Lanier. am not saying
whether there are questions that
can be asked or not. merely rule
on the objections to questions that
are asked. You may ask the court
anything you want to, but l will
tell you frankly now that the court
is not going to rule on anything
until l am confronted with the
question. / am not going to eros:
airy bridges until get to them il
the trial of this lawsuit.
After the jury had again beer
called back into the courtroom
Lanier put on the stand as a wit
ness, H. F. Emery of Fargo, a
real estate dealer and one of the
members of the jury panel from
which had been drawn the jury il
the first conspiracy case.
SIN his talk to the jury, did
Judge Miller say anything thai
Judge Miller say anything thai
prejudiced and inflamed you
mind against these defendants p
asked Lanier. After defense OBJ
lection, the court held the ques
ton improper ON the ground thai
it "didn't make any difference
what the impressions or conclu
sions of various jury members haC
been following the talk. Lanie-
persisted in the same line O.
questioning but was blocked eacl
time by objections of Murph!
which. objections were sustained
by the court.
Testimony Related
A transcript of the proceeding
at this point is given below:
Mr.. LANIER: If the Cour
please, this testimony is Offered
under this rule, reading from Cor
don against the United States
Eighth Circuit. "Clear or direc
testimony of one or more witnes
ses, or the testimony of one wit
ness to facts absolutely incompat
ible with the truth of the test
mony charged to be false, may b,
employed to sustain a verdict TO
perjury"
THE COURT: l have no quar-
rel with that rule at all, Mr.. Ian
Ter. If you will confine the ex
examination of this witness as t,
his knowledge of facts which ar,
in any way material to the issue
here, he will be permitted to an
Swer questions: but we are no
concerned with what his impress
ion was or conviction was o.
| wheather he was affected one wa,
or the other by this speech. Tha
is not the idea. The allegation
in the affidavit of prejudice mere
| ly tend to state the conclusions o.
their reaction, their impressions
and if they were honest in thef
opinions, why it can never b,
made the basis Of a perjury suit
We cannot prosecute men for thel
opinions; that is we can't do tha
in America, yet. There may b
a time when we can, but to dat,
we cannot.
Judge Cites Issues
| The test in a perjury case is th'
falsity of the statement and ;
knowledge on he part of the accus
sed of its falsity. A man may
make a statement in itself absol
utely false; but unless the gov
eminent could show that ne knew
/ fol