 |
Victor
|
The
Cripple Creek
Strike:
a History of
Industrial Wars
in Colorado,
1903-4-5
By Emma Florence Langdon
pages 499 to 510
COURT CONVENES.
Upon the convening of Court, May 9, a bill of particulars was asked for by the attorneys for the defense who explained that they had a right to know what the state had against the prisoners. Ordinarily in criminal cases there is a preliminary hearing at which the defendant is present, he sees and hears the the names of witnesses examined and on whose testimony the indictment was found. In this case nothing ordinary occurred. It was an extraordinary case from the kidnapping to the end. Absolute secrecy was maintained by the prosecution. They continued to declare they had unlimited evidence but refused to allow the defense to share their confidence as to the manner they expected to proceed. Senator Borah, for the prosecution said: "We are forced to move secretly as some of our most important witnesses have disappeared from Colorado."
Judge Wood withheld his decision for a few days. While awaiting the decision the attorneys continued their preliminary work. Judge Wood overruled the motion of the defense for a bill of particulars. This decision cleared away the last of the preliminary technicalities. Gladiators in the legal profession stripped for the combat and labor, with justice on its side, begun a fight against bank vaults with untold millions.
The work of selecting twelve men to act as jurors begun May 9. This proved to be a tedious task on account of the prejudice that had been created during the campaign by Gooding and associates, President Roosevelt's characterization of the men as ''undesirable citizens" and false press reports.
Attorneys representing the state were James H. Hawley, of Boise, known as one of the best criminal lawyers in the West, represented the Federation in one of its greatest conflicts; U. S. Senator W. E. Borah, also of Boise; Public Prosecutor O. M. Van Duyn, of Ada County, Idaho, and George Stone, special attorney for Canyon County, in which the murder was committed. A change of venue was taken to Boise from Caldwell upon application of the defense. A fair trial at Caldwell being considered impossible.
The attorneys for the defense were: E. F. Richardson, of Denver, Colorado; Clarence S. Darrow, of Chicago; Frederick Miller, Spokane, Wash.; John F. Nugent, of Boise; .Edgar L. Wilson, of Boise as assistant counsel and John H. Murphy, of Denver, general counsel for the Western Federation was on the ground to act in an advisory capacity, his health being such as to prevent him taking an active part.
Edgar L. Wilson is a former law partner of Judge Fremont Wood who presided at the trial, his retention as assistant counsel was a surprise to the prosecution.
With such talent as Clarence Darrow and E. F. Richardson as leading counsel organized labor was ready to measure steel with organized greed in spite of their countless millions and government machinery.
May 9, three jurors were passed by the state and defense, panel exhausted. Special venire of one hundred ordered. Court adjourned until Monday, 2 o'clock, afternoon, May 13. This was the result of the first day's actual work in the trial of William D. Haywood.
From May 9 to May 30, the work of examining jurors continued in tedious monotony. Until on the night of the 30th the sixty-first citizen of Ada county was rounded up on the third special venire. The examination of prospective jurors sometimes brought out amusing as well as serious facts. At the close of the afternoon session June 3, the jury had been completed, sworn in and the indictment read.
Jurymen that rendered the verdict in the famous Haywood trial:
Thomas B. Gess, farmer, 59; Finley McBean, rancher, 52; Samuel D. Oilman, farmer, 57; Daniel Clark, farmer, 32; George Powell, farmer, 60; V. Sebern, farmer, 52, (served on Tom Horn jury also); H. F. Messecar, farmer, 52; Lee Scrivener, farmer, 60: J. A. Robertson, farmer, 73; Levi Smith, carpenter, 42; A. P. Burns, retired rancher, 52; Samuel Russell, farmer, 68.
Perhaps the hardest fight between attorneys during the empaneling of the jury occurred in the case of a banker who did not hesitate to admit he was opposed to the Federation, that he would allow that prejudice to influence him, and upon being questioned, admitted he would not want anyone to sit on a jury to try him if they had formed an opinion such as his own. This occurred on the last day. Judge Wood overruled the challenge that was raised by the attorneys for the defense. The action of the court in this instance caused fair-minded people to think the judge was showing partiality to the prosecution. The prosecution had challenged (and been sustained by the Court) for no other reason than the fact that the prospective juror admitted reading some Socialist or Labor paper. Of the large number of men that were summoned for jury duty in this trial there were few, if any, members of organized labor, yet Boise has a membership of organized workers of over one thousand. Among the men summoned for jury duty the bankers were decidedly in the majority.
The jury selected to try Haywood was not composed of men who had any particular love for organized labor. They were men whose environments, vocations in life and reading gave them wrong impressions as to the objects and aims of men banding together in labor unions. Politically, the jury stood eight Republicans, three Democrats and one Prohibitionist. Not one member of organized labor. Majority Republican—the dominant party in Idaho.
ORCHARD AS WITNESS.
"If weakness may excuse,
What murderer, what traitor, parricide,
Incestuous, sacrilegious, but may plead it?
All wickedness is weakness; that plea, therefore,
With God or man will gain thee no remission."—Milton.
In the afternoon of June 5, the scenes were swiftly shifted and the curtain raised on another act in the tragedy. Hawley dramatically said: "Call Harry Orchard." Orchard was not far away—he had been closeted during the day three or four hours with McParland, who, no doubt, had put him through a rigid rehearsal. He was the star witness and through his testimony the state must either lose or win.
Orchard appeared in a few minutes and with uplifted hand took the oath that made him a perjuror. The first question— "where do you live" seemed to be a surprise and for a moment unnerved him. Upon being re-assured by the state's attorneys he told his story.
Here it would be well to mention that Detective McParland claimed Orchard's "confession" was brought about on account of a change of heart—he had repented of his sins and did not hope for reward here but had "confessed" in order to be at peace with God.
The writer regrets space will not permit the reproducing of Orchard's testimony. The slightest intimation upon his part, while he was telling his story, that he was actuated by compunction or reformation brought a sneer to the lips of the auditors in the court room. He recited chapter after chapter of cold-blooded murders, without a flicker of an eye-lash a story of heartless villainy that showed he had memorized even to the slightest detail, the story framed up for him to deliver on the witness stand. He told without a quiver of the lips how he had gone to California to poison the Bradley family. How he purchased strychnine to place in the milk left by the milkman, that would kill a family of four, one of which was an innocent babe. Even the baby in its cradle did not appeal to this soulless monster, whose own story upon the witness stand, if true, wrote his name upon the page of history in letters of blood as the deepest dyed villain that ever polluted the earth.
Continuing, Orchard related how he planned to kill Peabody but failed; how he shot Lyte Gregory in Denver; how he planned the Murder of Moffat, Goddard, Gabbert and others but failed. He claimed the explosion that killed Wally in Denver, was caused by a bomb he had placed for Judge Gabbert. How the wrong man had picked up the pocket-book he had attached to a wire, which, when picked up would explode the bomb, Gabbert, according to Orchard, passed without noticing the pocket-book. Before he left the witness stand he had charged himself with every kind of crime from bigamy to twenty-six cold-blooded murders. Some of the crimes he referred to as "jobs" he claimed to have been assisted by others—it seemed to please him especially to implicate Steven Adams. The latter, he stated, assisted him in the blowing up of the Independence depot in 1905. The dates of the murders he testified to being guilty of ranged from 1899, at Wardner, Idaho, to the murder of ex-Governor Steunenberg, December 30, 1905, in the same state. According to his testimony, at intervals between the greater crimes, he was engaged in highgrading, kidnapping children or any odd job of villainy he could find to do either for money or from force of habit. He claimed he had taken part in every crime committed in Colorado since strike troubles existed—according to his account he blew up the Vindicator mine, killing two men; the Independence depot disaster of June 6, 1904, was all his work. He told every detail with a careless air as though reciting a mere incident.
When Harry Orchard had finished his blood-curdling story of crime he made the great criminals of the world look like amateurs compared to this man who told, without a sob of ushering a score of men into eternity without provocation—just for a few paltry dollars. The writer is constrained to doubt if mere "confession" to a Pinkerton would be sufficient reparation in a case so heinous.
Orchard was thoroughly groomed and coached in all the revolting details to give an element of plausibility to his "confession." But it is safe to say that not one of the three million unionists who were watching the trial of William D. Haywood, believed any part of the story of crime as related by this degenerate. His story branded him as unreliable, a confirmed liar, a seeker after notoriety, a Nero of modern times and the Ananias of today. He was the chief instrument in the colossal conspiracy to destroy organized labor.
No one but Orchard, over-trained by a criminal detective agency, advanced any testimony that incriminated either of the three kidnapped victims. He was the tool of the Pinkerton detective agency and the same agency used him in order that thousands of dollars might flow into the coffers of a gang who make a specialty of furnishing convictions through professional perjurers.
The testimony on both sides, proved absolutely, that for years the Pinkerton agency used blood money to purchase the honor of weak men in the Federation and make them Benedict Arnolds to violate the obligation that they had taken in the sanctuary of organized labor.
Orchard, foul and infamous as he proved himself to be, said in his cross-examination that Haywood had nothing to do with the Vindicator explosion or the murder of Lyte Gregory, one of his alleged victims. He also admitted neither Moyer or Haywood advocated law-breaking during the strike in the Cripple Creek district, Colo. During his testimony he had described the blowing up of the Bradley home in California by dynamite. He had also climbed on the porch of this same Bradley home to await the milk man, his intentions being to place strychnine in the milk. It was shown the house in which Bradley lived did not have a porch. The explosion at the Bradley home was caused by gas. The statements made relative to the poisoning and later of dynamiting the Bradly home was disproved by numerous depositions taken and also witnesses introduced by the defense.
Mention should be made of the treatment accorded Orchard by the state officials after the alleged confession. He was well dressed in a summer suit, sleek, well fed, and, judging by appearances might have been a capitalist, rather than a self-confessed criminal of so many aliases that it is doubtful if his true name has been included in the list. He was treated more as a distinguished guest of the state than as the villain he painted himself when he swore on the witness stand he had murdered twenty-six people for a few dollars, he had stolen sheep, collected money on insurance on stolen cheese, deserted his wife and become a bigamist, made bombs to destroy life for a Pinkerton agency and other crimes which would brand him as the most heartless Cain that ever lived in a world's history.
Was it because the state had taken McParland's word as a fact when he sent broadcast the statement that Orchard had repented of his sins and was "as harmless as a Saint?" True it is he was well-groomed and treated as an honored guest. It has been stated and not denied to the writer's knowledge, that the widow of the dead governor had even expressed a willingness for him to go free. Presumably, this was the reward for his effort to punish some one for the crime.
OTHER WITNESSES.
The prosecution summoned about one hundred and fifty witnesses in their effort to substantiate Orchard's testimony. Pinkertons were employed to watch their witnesses. The state was forced to send an army of witnesses back home who had not been called to the witness stand. The prosecution began to realize early in the hearing of testimony that the testimony that they had to offer would have but little weight before any fair Court. McParland was lacking in nerve when the time came for him to testify. He had experienced one siege of Darrow's rapid fire cross-examination during the Adams trial and he was afraid another grilling of the same kind would land him behind prison bars. In the slang phrase he got "cold feet." He was afraid to tell the jury what he had so often caused the capitalist press to herald to the world. He found different conditions to face to what confronted him in Pennsylvania when he caused many innocent victims murdered upon perjured testimony. He, no doubt, realized he could not murder working men in the West today as he did in the East thirty years or more ago. Notwithstanding this, however, the Idaho taxpayers will pay the debt of an enormous sum as did the small property owners pay the mine owner's war debt during the reign of Peabody in Colorado.
While James McParland, who lives by blood money as a spy, failed to testify for the mine owners—his brother who earns an honest living as a shoemaker, did not fail to take the witness stand and tell of the high-handed methods of the mine owners in Cripple Creek. He was among the deported by the mandate oi' a mine owners organization. He made a strong witness for the defense. Strange there could be such a contrast in the same family.
The defense introduced witnesses from all walks of life, in unlimited numbers, no ground was left uncovered. The attorneys for the defense upon cross-examination of the state's witnesses and by the introduction of scores of witnesses summoned from all sections that had been mentioned by the prosecution soon razed to the ground the conspiracy house built on sand by the mine owners and the political ring of two states, indorsed by organized capital of the United States.
NO CORROBORATION.
McParland and the attorneys for the state frequently declared that the unbelievable story of crime and bloodshed as told by Orchard would be fully corroborated but when the prosecution closed its case the perjured story of Orchard stood alone. The whole case of the state turned upon his testimony, which, under the law, had to stand or fall on the success or failure to introduce a measure of corroborative evidence. When the test came the state could not show outside of Orchard's testimony even a connecting link between any of the crimes credited to the officials at Western Federation headquarters, directly or indirectly.
PEABODY AND GODDARD WITNESSES.
Among the distinguished witnesses for the state was the name of Judge Goddard of the Supreme Court of Colorado. Conspicuous in the list of witnesses for the state appeared the name of Peabody and daughter, of Colo. His former Adjutant General Bell and the present Adjutant General Wells, who had acted as escort to the victims to Idaho and many others who had acted as tools in the capacity of deputy sheriffs during the Colorado labor troubles. The writer asks the reader how you would like to see your daughter go on the stand to corroborate the testimony of such a one as Orchard?
NOT GUILTY.
Into the stillness of a summer morning—into the beautiful sunlight of a Western Sabbath day, William D. Haywood walked forth a free man, July 28, 1907.
It was after it had been out for twenty-four hours that the jury, which at first had been divided eight to four and then seemed deadlocked at ten to two, finally came to an agreement shortly after the first faint streaks of the coming day showed gray above the giant hills which wall Boise to the North and Bast. The weary, snow-bearded old bailiff, who had kept an all-night vigil before the door of the jury room, was startled into action by an imperative knock from within. Events moved rapidly enough after this, and when at last the principal actors in the trial had been gathered into the court room at a few minutes before 8:00 o'clock, the white envelope handed by the foreman to the judge was torn open and the verdict read:
''State of Idaho against William D. Haywood: We, the jury, in the above entitled cause find the defendant, William D. Haywood, not guilty.—Thomas B. Gess, foreman."
Then came the congratulations, in the midst of which Judge Wood said:
"The defendant will be discharged and the jury dismissed for the term.''
"Twelve good men and true" have been the hope of justice among Anglo-Saxons for centuries—and in the twelve farmers of Idaho has been found men who place life and principle above gold. Our form of government is vindicated. It is only when dishonestly administered that the law fails.
The acquittal of William D. Haywood was accepted everywhere as the vindication of Moyer and Pettibone. In the language of John M. O'Neill: "The verdict of the jury means the most glorious battle that has ever been won by the Western Federation of Miners and puts a sparkling gem in the crown of organized labor of this country."
The verdict of the Boise jury marks a decisive stage in a serious crisis in the life of this country. For the Haywood trial was a National crisis. The struggle between the working class and capitalist class was displayed in all its tremendous significance. But a jury of twelve men, living almost on the scene of the crime, admittedly prejudiced in advance, one of them having dwelt with the murdered man for two years, after listening to the evidence, was won over to the defense. They acquitted Haywood and therefore justified our confidence in tour comrades and our faith in humanity.
"Not Guilty" soon flashed over the wires, was pronounced in every nook and corner of the globe, hands were clapped and hearts rejoiced and tears of joy were shed.
The Haywood case was the greatest case ever submitted to the decision of a court; not even excepting that world-renowned one wherein Edmund Burke impeached Warren Hastings at the bar of the House of Commons. Then the prosecutor spoke for humanity, India's silent, submissive millions found voice through Burke, Sheridan and Fox. Here the contrast ends, the likeness begins, for in that historic trial all the forces that enable the strong to hold down the weak were on the side of the exploitee invested with regal power and against the robbed. Here those same forces were arrayed en masse against the accused, the hopes of the silent ones were with him. He had helped to teach them how to strike and when. They knew he was confronting death because he had battled for them. They were looking upon what might be a sacrifice. Here was a man who had attested his faith in life, stood ready to prove it in death.
Some way his fellows had lost the submissiveness that had stamped them in the old days. Their hands were not clasped, they were clenched, they did not implore the Heavens for mercy, in tones that would not be denied they demanded justice. In every zone and tongue the protest was registered and eyes peered through the mist, saw men high in place stooping to make a mockery of the forms of law, President and perjurers alike the tool of forces that made mockery of justice, noted the gold in the scales and wondered how much steel would be required to balance it.
In every land they gathered. The Alaskan gold seeker under the play of the Northern Lights wondered what new curse would be written on the rule of gold. The Englishman, walled in by conservatism, had felt the walls fall in his own country when the Taff Vale decision was handed down, saw the hands sweep backward on the Clock of Time when our Supreme Court legalized kidnapping and felt that perhaps Runnymede was in vain after all. Under the Southern Cross the Australian miner and herder looked up at the starry vault, thought how long the greed of gain had lain on the soul, over what oceans and deserts it had come to cast its shadow over all the sons of men. The German felt within him the fires of '48 as the wires brought to him the story of an autocracy more brutal than that of Germany's war lord. Only the Marsellaise could tell the revolt in the Frenchman's soul and the Italian longed for a new and nobler Garibaldi. In the silent watches the Siberian exile recalled the long, weary way, counted the miles behind and the days before him, pondered on the crimson pathway Freedom's sons have ever trod to prison and scaffold, pondered how much the Liberty of the new world resembled the despotism of the old, pondered till he fell asleep and dreamed it was Dawn.
Yea, not only from Boston to San Francisco, but throughout these wide lands the hearts of the workers were united by this menace to one of their class!
At the bar of the court the formal charge said Haywood was to answer on the charge of complicity in the murder of Frank Steunenberg, but in reality the crime was a graver one in the judgment of the conspirators. The ferocious hate borne the prisoner by the ruling class was but thinly veiled by the indictment charging him with a terrible crime. All other crimes may be forgiven but he who would teach the slave the love of freedom must bear the hate of the master through his life, fortunate if in death the odium of prison or scaffold do not fall upon his grave, blasting all who come near him in life.
Haywood had hopes wider than his own fireside, desires that could only be gratified when his fellow workers took a seat with him at the banquet of life. He had a nobler incentive than to shift the burden of his chains upon a weaker or less fortunate brother. Had he been content with a place for himself, strong hands would have lifted him up and the mercenaries of press and pulpit would have pointed out the rewards to ambition. Haywood's organization, does not exist for the benefit of the officers but for the toilers. It did not come to hide the class conflict but to end it and Haywood merely did his duty—gave the members what they wanted.
The conviction of the secretary-treasurer of the Western Federation of Miners would have been a deadly blow to the labor movement of this country and the unions appreciated the situation. They realized that organized labor would receive a staggering blow if the conspiracy was not exposed—so they rose in a body to meet the emergency and fought a legal battle and won.
It would be impossible to review the many chapters in the history of the trial. Attorneys Richardson, Darrow, Murphy, Nugent, Breen, Wilson, Miller and Whitsell covered themselves with glory and won a battle that enrolled their names on the page of history as legal giants.