Hellraisers Journal: From the Appeal to Reason: Clarence Darrow Speaks: “Adams’ Prosecution a Fraud and Humbug.”

Hellraisers Journal, Sunday March 17, 1907
From the Appeal to Reason: Clarence Darrow Speaks

In the this week’s edition of the Appeal, it is reported that the jury in the Steve Adams’ trial, which took place in Wallace, Idaho, could not reach agreement and was, therefore, discharged by Judge Woods. On the same page is published the closing argument of Clarence Darrow, counsel for the defense, which we are pleased to offer below:

DARROW SPEAKS
—–

Adams’ Prosecution a Fraud and Humbug
—–
A Manifestation of the Inevitable
War of the Classes.
—–

—–

The merits of the Adams case and motives prompting the prosecution are strikingly set forth in the closing argument of Clarence Darrow, counsel for the defense, in the following clear and forceful presentation. Said Mr. Darrow:

It is the truth that much as I love justice, and much as I hate punishment of any sort, I have neither the time nor ability to defend every poor man charged with a crime. That is not the reason I am here.

Mr. Knight has said, and I do not deny it, that back of this man are the funds of a great organization, the small contributions of thousands of workingmen, and it is true that a great effort is being made to defend him, but it is also true that the state of Idaho never prosecuted a man before as this man is being prosecuted.

The officers of this county have been shoved aside and the greatest lawyer in the state has been employed. More than that, the state of Colorado has been called upon, months of the time of the greatest detective of the west have been given to bring him to the gallows, the state of Washington brought another who used his time without stint. It is a remarkable case, unprecedented in the annals of criminal proceedure.

Not For Justice.

It is not for justice that the life of this humble, almost unknown, workingman has been placed in jeopardy, that the machinery of the state has been set in motion, and all the millions of the mine-owners of the west have been called upon. Beyond this case, out of this courtroom, out in the world, the greatest fight in the world-the fight between the capital and labor of this country-is being waged, of which this is but a manifestation.

I want to measure every word I say in this case. It may seem harsh to you, but it is true. This prosecution from beginning to end is a humbug and a fraud; it is a crime and an outrage, with not one jot of honesty, one particle f sincerity or integrity since the day this man was arrested until now. I say this without regard to whether this man is guilty or innocent.

Who is this man? What does this prosecution mean? He is a man who has been characterized by Mr. Knight as a vile monster: a man almost whose breath is purification; a criminal, assassin.

I know nothing of Steve Adams’ life, and of his history and crimes in Colorado. If he has committed crimes in that state, let them try him for them; it is not for me to consider here. I will discuss the case at bar. Assuming that Steve Adams killed this man, which I believe he did not, how stands the case? Aside from this confession, what evidence has the state produced to show that Fred Tyler came to his death at all, saying nothing about who was his slayer? None whatever.

Proof Insufficient.

The body which is supposed to be the remains of Fred Tyler was found more than a year ago, buried and forgotten until resurrected after the killing of a great man down here in southern Idaho-dug up for the purpose of hounding some man to his death.

In the first place, the law says that you must be satisfied that a crime has been committed, and this cannot come from the confession, for confessions have been found to be so unreliable that the law says you cannot establish a crime by a confession-you must have other proof. The evidence in this case must show beyond a reasonable doubt that Fred Tyler is dead and that he came to his death by the commission of a felony upon his living body by Steve Adams.

The mere fact that the body of a man was found in the Marble Creek country about half a mile from Jack Simpkins’ cabin is no proof. No one identified that body as Fred Tyler. True, witnesses came in and testified that Fred wore a pair of overalls because a pair of overalls was found upon him. At first it was a pair of military trousers; his low-crowned hat blossomed into a high-crowned hat; his blue undershirt changed into two undershirts, for two undershirts are produced here as having come from the remains found, although everyone testified that Fred Tyler never wore but one shirt in the summertime. A jumper is also produced, and it is something no one ever heard of or saw Fred Tyler wear. Part of an old shoe is produced.

The very things that would help to identify the body as being that of Fred Tyler are not here. The base-ball finger, which would be a good means of identification-one of the best-where is it? The shoes that the brother-in-law made, and which were uncommon in style, where are they? All of these things have disappeared, and these bones and these rags are brought in and placed in evidence to identify the remains as those of Fred Tyler.

Nothing to Identify Body.

We have tried all during this case to bring in a pair of shoes as exhibits which were buried with the remains, but without avail. Gentlemen of the jury, the state cared so little for this man when his remains were found that they did not even take the trouble to bury with him all that belonged to his remains, and they buried in that grave things that did not belong to it.

Now, at this late date, they would have you believe that they are prosecuting Steve Adams for the killing of this woodsman, Fred Tyler. Ah, that is the stuff that dreams are made of. Boule was killed in open daylight, by the unanimous uprising of all the settlers in that district, and nobody card about him either. Two years and a half afterward they seek to get Adams. They tell us they are going after Glover and Mason, two other men implicated in this confession.

Mason is a man who went upon a timber claim in the Marble Creek country and hewed a home for himself and wife and seven children just for a jumper to come in and take.

When Mr. Knight tells you that he means also to prosecute Glover and Mason, he does not mean it, and he says it just for effect, just as he uses that poor mother’s tears to get a verdict in his favor. All the northwest is interested in this battle, and there is no one who knows the case would say that Steve Adams should be punished for a crime, if such a crime was committed, in which all the settlers in that district had a hand and of which all were guilty.

The proposition is plain, the reason of Adams’ arrest is apparent to all. He came up into this country some two years ago. He left. No one knew or cared for his coming or his going. Two years after the ex-governor of the state is assassinated. A man is arrested. The whole country is engaged in an attempt to discover the perpetrator of the crime. One man is caught, almost red-handed, and he confessed. It was his only chance to save his life, and he implicated somebody else.

Falsehood and Perjury.

It was this man who gave McPartland [McParland] the name of Steve Adams, and told of Adams’ life in Colorado and of his troubles. Everybody knows that when Steve Adams was arrested as a fugitive, charged as a suspect in the killing of Steunenberg, he was arrested on a false and perjured charge; that in the attempt to get the members of the Western Federation of Miners in their hands they exerted every means in their power, and perjury was the least of them.

They arrested Steve Adams to choke out some evidence against Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone. They took him to the pen, and Whitney, who should have given him protection, allowed him to be placed upon the rack by one of the most notorious detectives known, who extracted this confession. It was this vagabond detective and Harry Orchard, a self-confessed criminal, who did the work.

We are told that Steve Adams made this confession, not through fear or hope, but for love of himself and his wife, his fellow workmen and his God. If so, why did he not stick to it. The first time he managed to get a friendly ear, after six months’ confinement in the pen, he stretched out his hands and said: “For God’s sake, get me out of here; this confession I have made is a lie.”

The moment he was at liberty he repudiated it. Why then his confession? Some motive influenced his humble mind when he signed that document. Was it love of his family and his fellow men? If so, he forgot it the first chance he got. The motive can be read from every page of the criminal prosecution. Fear and hope.

Web Woven by McPartland.

This man was all alone, his uncle away, his attorney bought over by the state, the attorneys for the state there, McPartland there, Harry Orchard there, and no one to help him. He was called a good man by Whitney. McPartland’s mind and this man’s mind in contrast; one cunning and acute, as cunning as the spider that weaves its web to catch the fly. McPartland weaved his web to catch not only Steve Adams, but somebody else.

McPartland tells his bible stories. Oh, the devil can quote scripture, and so can a detective. Tells of St. Peter and of King David; tells of Jack Horn and Mollie Maguires, of Kelley the Bum, who had murdered somebody, and how McPartland saved him. Imagine yourself in Steve Adams position. No one was so much in the lime light of public hate as the murderer of Steunenberg; the voice of every citizen was against him, and he was safe nowhere.

Peace and safety promised for just the signing of a statement. Orchard had told him he had implicated him, and why not implicate someone else. Whitney told him to make this confession and he would be released to a place in glory. He was told that the state was good to those who were good to the state. He was told to confess or be taken to Colorado to be mobbed. It is then strange that Adams, to save his life, signed this statement.

A Spy and a Sneak.

This McPartland, what is his trade? Can you imagine a man a detective until every other calling is exhausted. He is a spy, a watcher of his fellow men, a sneak. Is this an honorable calling? It may be honorable to some of the things the state has done in this case; it is not honorable in the old fashioned sense of the word; it is a living lie. And this spy, traitor, liar, McPartland, held up before this poor, weak, simple mind the scaffold and the confession, the one and the other, and he told McPartland he would sign the statement. Then his wife was sent for and they set up housekeeping.

Never in all their simple life on the Oregon farm did they have such guests as in the penitentiary down at Boise. Mr. Hawley visited with them, sat down and talked with this red-handed murderer. United States Senator Borah called up them, then came McPartland and told them bible stories. Lots of others came. The governor of the state called, and, taking the baby from the cradle, kissed it on the cheek. Oh, they kept good company in the pen; the elite of Boise society they entertained. He was fed from the guards’ table and had the best in the land. But his brother and his uncle never saw him; never were entertained by him. They could not get in, until finally, in September, the uncle representing himself to be a delegate to the irrigation congress, got in and had dinner with Steve. Immediately thereafter he sought his freedom through a writ of habeas corpus, and immediately thereafter he was taken from his little home in the penitentiary and locked up in a cell.

Finally, he was released, and after that he was rearrested and brought a prisoner to this city, where he is now being tried for murder. He was brought overland and for the first time he was handcuffed. He was allowed his hands free when arrested for the Steunenberg assassination and for his Colorado offenses, but when charged with the murder of an unknown woodsman he was bound.

Not the Wording of Adams.

Taking up the confession, it is plain to be seen that it is not the wording of Steve Adams. It sounds to me more like Mr. Knight. And what was the oral confession made? McPartland and Thiele, both used to the ways of confession, tell us that Tyler was taken out and shot. Whitney tells us he was led out like an ox to slaughter, with a rope around his neck. I do not believe Whitney ever heard that. He is a hangman and is in the rope business, and just supplied that out of his own mind.

They say that the body was left about three miles from Simpkins’ cabin, and the confession tells us that, while as a matter of fact, it was found within half a mile. The confession tells us that it was laid between two logs so that it was hidden, and the fact is that it was on top of three logs and in plain sight of every passerby.

Phillips swears that Tyler never packed a gun, and Phillips knew him well enough to know, yet the confession says that he had a big gun and that one of the boys took it away from him when Adams held him up. So you see the confession was written by someone who did not know the real facts, but just enough of them to make a guess, and when he did guess he usually guessed wrongly.

Thiele said that Steve Adams said he gave the gun to a man in Nevada, yet he went to Nevada, talked with and saw the man and yet where is the gun?

It was McPartland’s desire to secure the implication of the officers of the Western Federation of Miners, and to that end he weaved their names into this confession, so that it might be used in evidence against them, yet Steve Adams, with a rope around his neck, refused to sign the statement without making some corrections. See, for instance, one question in this confession reads, “During the time you were acquainted with these men did you ever hear any conversation about the assassination of ex-Governor Steunenberg?” and the answer was made to read as follows: “They told me to go to Idaho and see Jack Simpkins, as he had something he wanted to tell me in regard to the Steunenberg matter?” and Steve would not stand for it and made them change it to read:”They told me to go to Idaho and see Simpkins as he had something he wanted to tell me.” They scratched out the “in regard to Steunenberg.”

Conspirators Confused.

Another question, “When did the talk of the assassination of Steunenberg first occur?” and McPartland answered, “Shortly after the dynamiting of the depot at Independence.” Steve would not stand for that and said, “Shortly after I saw Simpkins, which was shortly after the dynamiting of the depot at Independence,” and again refusing to implicate these men. Another: “Did they say they wanted to kill Steunenberg, or that they wanted to get him?” and again Adams made the correction that it was Jack Simpkins who said it, and that he said “get” Steunenberg.

St. John was also mentioned because he was also a member of the Federation as was Ed Boyce, the man to whom McPartland in the confession relates the money for the killing was sent.

It is all a part of a hellish plot to catch all the officers of the Federation, both present and past. When you read the confession you can see that it is not in Steve Adams’ language. I doubt if even McPartland dictated it all, for he could not say ten words without making a grammatical error.

Does this sound like Steve Adams: “I hope the reign of terror inaugurated by the Western Federation of Miners will cease?” McPartland did not say that. It took Borah and Hawley to put the polish on it.

———-

[Emphasis and photograph of Clarence Darrow added.]

SOURCE
Appeal to Reason
(Girard, Kansas)
-Mar 16, 1907
(Also source for image of text.)
https://www.newspapers.com/image/67586830/

IMAGE
HMP, Clarence Darrow, ab 1907
http://moses.law.umn.edu/darrow/photo.php?pid=345

See also:
Steve Adams (Western Federation of Miners)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Adams_(Western_Federation_of_Miners)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~