fb pixel

Log In

Reset Password

Mail Tribune 100

March 19, 1915

To the Editor: Up to this time I have absolutely refrained from making any statement in the press concerning the Martin case. I would not write this letter now, except that I feel that it is due to certain county officials to be put right with the public.


I am firmly convinced that any lawyer whom Martin might have employed would have obtained an acquittal. While I have been given by my friends the credit for a personal victory, it is only fair to say that the victory is due to the facts.

Irwin, the eyewitness, told three people — the sheriff, the deputy sheriff and Thomas Frye, an aged and respected citizen, that Hubbard was shot while getting out his pistol. He told four other witnesses that from the movement of Hubbard's elbow he was evidently getting out his pistol when shot. All of these statements, unfortunately for him, he denied on the stand.

There could have been no conviction by any district attorney on this state of facts.

The criticism of the sheriff for not assisting the prosecution is most unfair. The only thing that the sheriff did was to testify what Irwin told him immediately after the shooting. Certainly no one could expect the sheriff to perjure himself to assist in a conviction. . The deputy sheriff, Wilson, was compelled to testify upon this point, the same as Mr. Frye and the sheriff testified.


The reporters at the trial persistently misrepresented to the public the evidence as it went to the jury. The truth cannot be kept from the public. The country now generally knows what the evidence was. The regrettable thing about it is that papers from other portions of the state, basing their judgment upon what they read from local papers here, have been driven to a conclusion that the county officers were derelict in their duty and are to be censured, when in truth and in fact, no jury could have been selected that would have convicted Martin, if there had not been a syllable of evidence introduced, except that produced by the state itself, which evidence showed a case of self-defense.


A.E. REAMES, Medford