Evening star., 1944-07-13
BY CARTER BROOKE JONES

trial.
Justice Eicher said the court un-
derstands the motion and denied it.
Because Mr.. Laughlin was dis.
charged from this case" Mr.
Thompson began.
The judge said he did not care 10
hear further argument. Mr.. Thomp-
son kept talking.
Mr.. Marshal, will you seat Mr.
Thompson" the court directed.
But I'm seated" the attorney re-
torted. I'm not trying to be OBJ
'streperous." he added, I'm simply
trying to present my motion"
The court. Justice Eicher replied
pounding his gavel, had decided the
motion. You persisted in speaking
and are still speaking Gin contempt
of this court he added.
May I respectfully point out
another defense attorney, William j
Powers, intervened, that any at
torney has the right to rise at any
time to present a motion"
Flne0 EdT1eF In 1F1al.
Still addressing Mr.. Thompson.
Justice Eicher said he would give
the attorney at later time the op-
portunity to show cause why he
should not be adjudged in contempt
Mr.. Thompson earlier in the trial
was fined $500 for arguing with the
court.
Chief Prosecutor o. John Rogge
has not yet presented to the court
a petition which yesterday he no.
tif1ed,Justice Eicher he would offer,
dealing with Henry H. Klein, a
defense attorney, who walked out
of the case more than a week ago.
But the judge was confronted
again with the problem of providing
Mr.. kleins client, Eugene N. Sane
tuary. with a new attorney. Justice
Eicher, at the suggestion of Mr..
Rogge, again asked Sanctuary what
he had done about employing coun-
sci. The defendant said he had
been left in peculiar position and
he wanted to stand on whatever
constitutional rights he had.
Questioned on His Claims.
What constitutional rights do
you claim the court inquired, "in
view of your counsel's contemptuous
absence from this case?"
Sanctuary said he understood that
under the law Mr.. Klein had no
further standing in the case, since
Sanctuary's local attorney of record,
Mr.. Laughlin. had been dismissed.
Mr.. Klein is New York lawyer.
Sanctuary then objected to the
suggestion by the Government that
one of two attorneys representing
members of the German American
Bund on trial here be appointed also
to defend him. Sanctuary said he
never had been identified with the
bund and wanted nothing to do with
it. The defendant added:
When I was arrested-or. rather.
kldnapped-I was placed in a cell
with bundists. I do not want to be
identified with them in any way.
Not because I have anything against
them. but because they have nothing
to do with my case. I think the
trial should be continued until I
can get counsel
Grant Counsel for One Day,
The discussion ended with the
naming of Defense Attorney Harry
A. Grant to represent Sanctuary
Tor one more day only.
The prosecution had been asked
by the court to reveal by adjourn
ment time tonight when it expected
to complete presentation of the
present general documentary evi-
dence and get down to testimony
concerned directly with the charge
In the indictment.
Meanwhile, Special Prosecutor
Joseph w. Burns continued to read
to the jury extracts from articles in
the bund newspaper designed to
SHOW that the organization was
carrying out in this country a mis-
sion assigned by Nazi Germany.
When adjournment time came
yesterday the jury was dismissed for
the day, and Justice Eicher turned
to the prosecution tables:
The Government should be able
to give the court and defense coun-
sci by tomorrow night a statement
giving some indication of the time
required to present the present
documentary evidence to the Jury"
he said. 1T then will be right and
proper that the Government should
begin the introduction of evidence
directed specifically toward what
the Government claims will estab-
lish specific intent to violate the
act, as charged in the indictment"
The Judge added later: The
court Is hoping the Government will
give further report on the prog
ress Of the trial some time tomor-
row."
Much of the evidence thus far
admitted tentatively has concerned
activities before 1910. The indictment
charges violation of a law of May,
1910, forbidding acts aimed at the
loyalty of the armed forces in time
OF peace or war. The court held
that prior activities might have a
bearing on motive and intent.