Salt Lake Tribune | 1912-12-14 | Page 1 | Admits Evidence Against Archbald

ADMITS EVIDENCE ! AGAIWSTARCHBfiLDi Vote Taken in the Senate on Testimony of Boland, Chief Witness. WASHINGTON".' Dec. 1.'!. V,yx tho narrow nar-row margin of -? to l'0 votes, the senate .tytipS, .at ttyc JmpcachmQiit trial of .Judge I.olci't W, A roll bald if the comiiicroc court, admitted In evidence the testimony of C. G. Boland thai Ids attorney, G. M, "U'atson. tokl hlin Judge Arclibald waa interested with him In the .settlement of Iho Roland claim against the Delaware, ijackawnnna & "Western 'Rail road company com-pany and that I10 proposed to give the judge ono-fourlh of the amount received in excess of .!K",000. Tlio vote attracted attention because It was the first close division recorded during the trial. Thc house managers fought for the admission of thc testimony testi-mony and Judge Archibald's attorneys vigorously opposed II. After thc testimony testi-mony had been admitted Senator Payu-ter Payu-ter asked to be allowed to vote on its admissibility, but the privilege was denied de-nied him. 3lc announced that, after bearing the evidence, he was prepared to vote to exclude it. Representative Sterling, one of thc house, managers, declared tho managers had provHii a conspiracy between Wat-sou Wat-sou and Arclibald, for the latter to .ubo bis influence as a federal judge to effect tbe settlement; :md that, therefore, a declaration by one of the "conspirators,' "conspira-tors,' Watson, should be admitted in evidence against the other. Attorney Simpson for Judge Arclibald replied that there was no combination between Watson Wat-son and Arclibald, the judge desiring merely to do a friendly sict for Watson, but that there was no conspiracy- No conspiracy existed, because there was no agreement lo do an Illegal act, which Is a necessary eloment of a conspiracy. "Din Watson say' Judge Arclibald demanded de-manded pay?" asked Attorney Simpson in cross-examination. "No, sir," responded Mr. "Roland.