The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, September 19, 1895, Page 8

THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1895. THE LAST LINK AGAINST DURRANT FORG George King, Organist of Emmanuel Church, a Witness. DURRANT WAS GHASTLY. | His Hair Was Disheveled, His Eyes Bloodshot and His Face Pale. SAW HIM AFTER THE TRAGEDY. The First Witness to See the Pris- oner Not In Company With Blanche Lamont. THE DURRANT TRIAL IN A .\l[\'('TE—THE? LAST LINK. | The last link in the main chain of circum- stances by which District Attorney Barnes hopes to secure & conviction of Theodore Dur- rant, charged with the murder of Bianche Lamont, was forged vesterday by the testi- | mony of George R. King. | He is the organist of Emmanuel Church. | Atabout 5 o’clock of April 3 he was practicing | in the Sunday-school room, when Durrant ap- peared before him. Durrant was hatless and coatless, his hair disheveled, his face very pale and his eves congested | Durrant explained his condition he had been overcome by the gas while the burners. King went to the druggist’'s and bought him a bromide seltzer. | Afterward they went into the library, Dur- rant unlocking the door, and there they found Durrant’s hat and coat on a box in the corner. Durrant walked part of the way home with King. The only other witness of the day was Miss Turner, who came to say it was not she that eak had seen enter the church with Dur- TE T THE READER—If you wish only to Xnow what was actualiy accomplished in the Durrant case yesterday the foregoing summary will give you that information. If, however, it is your desire to learn the particularsof this interesting trial you will find subjoined & clear, succinct, impartial accountof all im- portant matters. Under no circumstances will the offensive details be admitted. They are not escential to an intelligent understanding of the progress of the case, and will be accorded Do place in these columns. TENTH DAY OF THE TRIAL. The Last Link In the Chain Fur- nished by the Defendant's Friend and Intimate. Since the taking of testimony in the trial of Durrant, charged with the murder of Blanche Lamont,began, nearly three weeks ago, each day has brought forth - its own sensations, its own convincing and | damaging evidence, but the testimony of George R. King, the organist of Emmanuel Church, seemed to be the climax of all | g the sensations of all the days that have | gone before. It forged the last link of the chain. Durrant was seen to enter the church in company with Blanche Lamont shortly after 4 o’clock. There the chapter ended Tuesday evening. | Yesterday the tragic tale was finished by | the evidence of George King. He went ! into the church about 5 o’clock. He went | to the Sunday- ol room and sat down before the piano to practice. He played a few minutes, and then his attention was attracted by a figure between the shding | 1 doors in front of him. He looked up and saw Theodore Durrant standing there in his shirt sleeves, bare- headed, his hair disheveled, his face color- | less and his eyes bloodshot. Blanche La- mont was not with him now. Anditisa noteworthy fact that George King, the friend and intimate of Durrant, is the first witness who saw Durrant that day when Blanche Lamont was not his companion. Was the strangled body of the murdered girl now lying in the belfry? And if it were not—Mr. Barnes will surely argue— why did she not appear in the doorws with Durrant? And how came Durrant {o | be hatless and coatless, his hair in disorder, his eyes congested and his face so pale! Durrant had a rez answer on lus tongue at the time. e told King he had been up fixing the gas burners, that he had been overcome by the gas, so that e could | scarcely get down the ladder. He asked | King to go to the drugstore and get him | some bromide seit: ! King performed the errand, and when he came back he found Durrant either in the | vestibule or z down on the platform in | the Sunday ool room. At the Police Court hearing Mr. King said he found Durrant in the vestibnle. And this is evidently where Mr. Barnes | wants him to be, for he questioned his witness yesterday until M r. King admitted that it was probable Durrant himselt, or | one of his attorneys had suggested to him | in private conversation, that Durrant might have been lying down. He had been to | see the defendant’s attorneys at their of- | fice, and he had been to jail to see Dur- rant. Mr. King gave his damaging testimony against his friend with apparent reluct- ance, and Mr. Barnes found it necessary to do considerable cross-examining to bring it all out. After Durrant took the seltzer he went to the looking-glass in the classroom and viewed his distorted features in the mir- ror. Then they carried the organ down a flight of stairs. Durrant was very weak,’| and had to stop ofien to rest, though he had the light end of the organ. Then they came back to the Sunday- school room and rested. And when rested they went to the library, and there lay Durrant’s hat and coat on a box in the corner. -Durrant put them on, and the | two went out of the church. Durrant walked a short way with King, and then | turned back to his own home, which was in the opposite direction. In its main points the testimony was ihe same as that given before the Police Court. Yet it came with none the less | dramatic force, and it had a fascination for Durrant only equaled by the interest with | which he regarded the evidence of Mrs. Crosett. There will be no court to-day, but on Friday the District Attorney will begin his work of riveting a little tighter the links already forgzed. He will not conclude the people’s case by Friday evening, and will probably consume the first day or two of the fourth week of the trial. e P s THE MORNING SESSION. George R. King Testifles With Evi- dent Reluctance Against His Friend and Assoclate, Durrant. ‘When court opened in the morning, Miss Edna Lucille Turner came to the wit- ness-chair just longenough to say that she did not go into the church with Durrant on the afternoon of April3. Mrs. Leak had testified that she thought the young woman with Durrant was either Miss Lamont or Miss Turner. There was no cross-examination of Miss Turner. George R. King, the organist of Em- manuel Church, took the stand. He is 19 years old, quite a comely lad and bright and understanding. It was with evident reluctance that he gave testimony against his friend, Theodore Durrant, and to some extent the examination of Mr. Barnes par- took rather of the nature of cross-question- ing. “Do you know Theodore Durrant, the de- iem\iun n this case?’” was the first question. “Yes, sir.” “Were you the organist of the church in April las “Ye! Gl hold? a ““He was assistant superintendent of the Sun- 1 t official position in church did Durrant u have been subpenaed for this trial Since have you visited Durrant ? “I think not.” “IHave ever visited Durrant in the County Jai “Ye: T. “How often “Twice, I think.” “Prior or subsequent to the Coromer’s in- were those visits 2 ubsequent.” “Prior or subsequent to the preliminary ex- amination ?” **Subsequent. “Did you visit him more than twice ?"” “No, sir.” “Did you visit the attorneys for the defense " “Once.” “Where " “At Mr. Dickinson’s office.” “Who was there 7’ “Mr. Dickinson and Mr. Deuprey.” “Was Detective Morse there?” u udge Thompson there 1" b “Since visiting Durrant at the jail have you had any conversation with him 2’ “Have you had conversation with his mother or father 2" “Yes, sir.” “How frequently 7" “Once or twice."” WVas your testimony the subject of the con- s, sir.” What did Durrant say to you at the jail?"” “He asked me if I remembered walking home with him on April 10. “Did you remember’ “Yes, sir.” “Do you remember it now?"” “Yeos Sire “Did'y of it?” “Yes, sir.” “How intimate were your relations with the u remember it before Durrant spoke | defendant?” “We were very good {riends.” “Were you a visitor at his house?” “Yes, sir.' “And he at yours?” «Yes, sir.” ur friends and his friends visit one another?” “Have you visited Mr. and Mrs. Durrantsiuce the preliminary examination?”’ “Yes, sir.” “How old are you?’ “Nineteen years.” “What is your occupation?” “I am working for & wire company.” “Was that your occupation on April 32 No,sir; I was then & pupil at the Boys’ h School.” “Did you know Blanche Lamont in her life- time?"” “I did.” “Do you know her sister, Maud?” d v here were you about 5 o'clock on the afternoon of April 37" “In Emmanuel Church.” “When did you arrive there?"” “Just about’d o'clock.” *Where did you enter?” At the front door.” Was that open or closed when you arrived?” t was closed.” “How did you enter?” “i unlocked the door.” “With your owp or a borrowed key?"” My own key."” s ‘thc south-side door to the church kept Fos, sir.” fave you a key toit?” es, si Who else has a key to that entrance?” he janitor, the president of the Ladies’ Society and Mr. Durrant.” “How long bas Durrant had & key to that door?” “I do not “Did know.” foore.” How do you reach the south-side door?” -“Through the gate at the south of the church and down a long walk.” “Is the fence gate locked?” “It was kept open at that time.” “On what side is the library situated?"” “On the north side.” “Did you have a key to the library on the 3a of Ap % “Ye lln\r many locks are on the library door ?”” ‘““How did the second lock come to be put on?” “‘We put it on to keep the children out.” “Who do you mean by ‘we ? “Mr. Durrant and myself.” “When wes the lock put on?” “The Saturday before April 3.” “\And April 3 was on Wednesday?” “Yes, sir.”” “What was the object of the “The first was easily opened.’ ‘‘When you entered the church on the after- noon of April 3, did you notice the library door?” “Yes, sir.” ““Was it open or closed?”” was open—wide open." “Who actually put that second lock on—yéu or Durrant?” “I don’t remember that.” “Who bought the lock?"” “It was one Durrent possessed.” “Did he bring it?"” “Yes, sir.” “Did any one else have a key to {t?” “No, sir.” “Who furnished your key?" “Durrant gave it to me.’ “When?" the time the lock was put on.” d you assist him witn the books?"” “I helped to arrange them.” ““Did you and Durrant receive any authority to put the lock on the door?” “No, sir.” “Who first suggested it?” “Mr. Durrant. He said the old iock was no gmid and we had better have another one on it “‘Had the old lock been opened 7’ “Yes, sir.” “Were any books taken?” don’t know.” “Was there a catalogue?” “Yes, sir. Durrant made a catalogu, “When you went into the church that after- noon what is the first thing you did?"” went from the lobby to the library. Why did you go there?” 0 see if gas was escaping.”” Second lock?” When you entered the church did you smell it?” “Yes, sir."” “Why did you go to the library to see about the ga: “The day before I had put a new burne the gas in the closet of tl’?e library.” B “Did you test the burner in the closet?” “Yes, sir.” “‘Did you have to pass througn the library to do that? “Yes, sir.” +Did you notice anything in the library.” “No, &ir.” “What did you do then?” “Iwent out and closed and locked the li- brary door and went into the main Sunday- school room.” Witness was reqyired to point out on a diagram of the interior of the church how he passed into the room. Upon being closely questioned about the diagram— after Deuprey had called attention to the furniture shown in it and claimed that it was not disposed as it was on April 3—wit- Dess testified that.he was present when Draughtsman Russell made the measure- ments for the diagram, and that he had indicated to Russell where the furniture was located on the afternoon in question. “Were the sliding-doors open like that?™ ssked M‘r. Barnes, pointing t6 the dingram. “No, sir.” 1| tittle way.” “You told Mr. Russell they were open like that, diGn’t you 7 “No, sir; I'told him they were opened only a “What did you do when you left the library ?” “I went into the Sunday-school room and ook a seat at the piano on the stool.” The Court—Facing which direction ? Witness—Toward the sliding-doors—toward the east. “What did you do at the piano ?”’ asked Barnes. “I began to play.” ¢ «“How long did you play 2" “Two or three minutes.” “Can’t you fix the time more definitely 7 “No, sir.” “‘Were you practicing & piece ?” “Yes, sir.” id 9 play it through ?” A No, s “What interrupted you ?” “The appearance of Mr. Durrant at the slid- ing-doors. He came and stood there & moment end looked at me.” What did he do then " “He passed through the doors.” “Did he speak first ?” 0, I spoke.” “What did you say 2" “Istopped playing at once and said to him, “You are pale.””’ i Mr. Barnes turned to King's testimony at the Police Court trial and read: Q.—When you returned what occurred? A.—I met Durrant in the vestibule and gave him the bromide seltzer. “Did you s0 testify?”” Deuprey—We object to that. It does not alter his testimony. It is not allowable except for the purposes of impeachment. Barnes—I only propose to refresh his mem- or: prey—Well, we object, unless it is offered to impeach the witness. The court—I understand it's a matter of recollection. I think the question is proper. I overrule the objection. Barnes—Please answe- the question. “I did so testify,” said the witness. s that correct . “z:h;khn is not correct.” ‘What has caused you to chan, our mind?”’ X ) “On cross-examination it was suggested to gle‘”l‘h,_lt Durrant might have been lying own. “Has it been suggested toyou except on cross-examination?” “I think not.” “Are you sure it was not?” No, I am not sure.” sn'tita fact that it was suggested to you in private conversation?” «He asked me if I wanted any. “Did you take any ?"” “No, sir.” “What occurred after taking the bromide.” “We returned to the Sunday-school room, and sat down and rested a few minutes.” “The main Sunday-school room or the infant class?” “The main roo “Did you have a conversation with the de- fendant after you brougnt the seltzer?” fore he took it?”’ Before or immediately after.” “I don’t recall any.” “Do you recall & conversation in which the name of a third party was used?” “1 don’t recall it.” “Don’t you remember him speaking about something that occurred in the morning?” ‘“Yes; 1 remember he told me he had been on the car with Blanche Lamont that morning?”’ “After you had rested what did you do?” “We carried the cabinet organ down the back stairs.” “Did you experience any difficulty in this?’ “Yes, sir; considerable.” "\\'!lf'? ““Well, the stairs were narrow for one thing.” “What else?” “Durrant was very weak.” “Was Durrant still without his coat or “I think he was.”” \\\\ 1 N R AN [Sketched in the courtroom yesterday by a “Call” artist.] “Was there anything else in his appearance that attracted you aside from the pallor 2 “Yes, sir; his coat and hat were off and his hair was disheveled.” “Did he make any reply ?” “He came through the doors and told me he had been fixing the gas in the auditorium, that | he had been overcome by it to such a degree that he could hardly descend the ladder.” i z there anything else you noticed in his | con ? “Well, I thought he was ill. He looked like it.” “Did he make any request of you 2" “Yes, sir; he gave me a 50-cent piece and asked me to get him so:me bromide seltzer.” “Did you go for it "' ! “Yes, sir. Twent to the drugstore, at Twenty- third and Valencia streets, and bought a quar- ter’s worth.” { “Was your hat off oron 7" “It was on.” “Where did you leave him when you went out ?” the center aisle of the Sunday-school.” “Was he standing or sitting?”’ “He was standing.” “How did you go out?” “Through the front door.” ““I think it probably was.” “Can you say by whom?"” sir.” an you say when?" Deuprey—We object to that. The witness Has said it was not suggested to him. The court—My recollection is that he said it probably was. ~However, Mr. District Attor- ney, you can put the question’ hypothetically. Deuprey—This amounts to a virtual cross- examination of his own witness. The court—Well, I will aliow the hypotheti- cal question. Barnes—When do you consider it probable this suggestion was made to you? Deuprey—We object. The question assumes it was probable. The court—The question is proper. The wit- has said it was probable. Witness—It was made either in the office af the attorneys for the defense or at the Broad- way jail. t was made in the jall, by whom was it maqe?’ “By the defendant.” “If it was made in the attorney’s office by whom was it made?” “By Mr. Dickinson or Mr. Deuprey.” R “Now, having had your memory refreshed to AS THE COURTROOM I8 SOMEWHAT DARK, SOME OF THE LADIES TAEKE FIELD GLASSES W.TH THEM. [Sketched in the courtroom yesterday by a “Call” artist.] “How did you enter again?” “Through, the same door. Itound it closed and unlockéd.” ““Where did you find Durrant when you re- turned?” “Ile was either standing in the lobby or else | }%{)ng on the platform in the Sunday-school s “Which was it?” “I can’t recollect now which it was.” “Did you ever see him lying on the platform before?” u"t;n sir; but I think he was lying there this ime. “‘Is it not a fact that he was standing in the lobby when you returned ?” . _ Witness studied the inci:flry for some time and finally he thought not. Then that extent, can you say at which place 1t was that the suggestion was made?” Deuprey—We object. He has not had his memory refreshed. The court—Overruled. Witness—No, I cannot say. ““I call your attention again to the transcript of your former testimony.” Deuprey—We object. The court—Overruled. Witness—Yes, I so testified. ““What did be, Durrant. do when you gave him the bromide seltzer?” :*He took it to the kitchen.” “Did you go with him?” Yot Twent wm'\“him.';l i Ar, e say anything whe: ande i the seltzor?? © ek i “Not that I recall.” “Did he say anything in the kitchen.” “Who went first in carrying the organ? Who had the heavy end?"* 1 went first, Di your back or your face to the d you stop on the stairway?” “Yes; several times.” “Where did you go after that?" “We went to the library.” “Did you find it locked or unlocked ?” «It was locked.” --{_nu had locked it when you wert out?” cs, sir.”" “Who unlocked it now?” “Mr. Durrant.” “He had his key?” “Yes, sir.” “What did he do then?” “He put on his hat and coat.” ““Where were they?” ‘They were lying on a bex in the corner.” “Did you see his hat and coat lying there vhen you first went into the library?” No, sir.” “Where were the hat and coat lying, with ref- erence to the door, when you went in the sec- ond time?” Here Mr. Deuprey made an exhaustive objection, claiming that the question assumed that the hatand coat were not there when witness first entered the library. g The objection was overruled, and wit- ness pointed out o the diagram a corner to the left of the door as the place where the hat and coat were found. This was 1n the main library-room. “Now, on the stairway, when you were carrylng the organ, did you have any conver- sation?” “When we stopped Durrant said he was still overcome by the gas.” “How many times did you stop?” “About three times?"” “How long is that flight of stairs?” “I couldn’t say that.” “More than one story long?” “But one story.” “After Durrant got his coat and hat from the library, what did you do?” “We left the church by the front door and went home.” “What time was this?” “About 6 o'clock.” “Which way did you go?” “We went down Bartlett to Twenty-second street and then to Ci ? “Where did you reside?” “At521 Capp street.” “‘Wns Durrant’s residence in the same direc- tion?” “No. sir. Helived at 1025 Fair Oaks avenue; in the opposite direction.” “Where did Durrant leave you?” “At Twenty-second and Capp streets.” “When you first saw Durrant between the lulding doors did he have anythingin his hands?” “No, sir.” “Did you accompany Durrant to the wash- stand?” “Xo, sir.” “Did you see him go there?"” “No, sir.” “Did_you have any conversation with him about that?” ‘No, sir.”” Dickinson—We object to this cross-examina- tion. The court—Overruled. “Have you ever fixed the gas jet inthe church?”’ No, sir.” T the sunburner?” sir.” “Did you use any tools when you fixed the gas jet in the library closet?” “Yes, sir. A gas-wrench.” ",l\)m Durrant have any tools in his hand?” “No, sir.” “Do you know if there were any tools keptin the church?” “A few were—a chisel, hatchet, wrench and such lhin{:." “Whom have you seen use the hatchet, ifany- o “Durrant. He used it when he put the lock on the door.” “What did Durrant do with the hatchet then?” en? ‘He laid it down somewhere."” “Do vou think you could identify the hatchet?” “I.don’t think so.” “Please examine this hatchet.” “Yes; thatlooks like the one in the church.” ““How long were you together in the church that afternoon?” ““About an hour.” ““Did you see anybody elsein the church while you were there?” ‘No, sir.” 'Did you hear any noise at any time?” Only what we made.” ‘Did'yon know Blanche Lamont?” 354 S0 her § pan; & you ever see her in com; with th delendn}lt‘l" s “Yes, sir.” “How often?” “Perhaps halfa dozen times. Iwent home with them. Blanche and Durrant, and Maud and myself.” “You took them to the door only?” “Yes, sir.” “When did these occasions happen?” “On Sunday evenings.” “Did you have anv conversation with Dur- rant concerning the disappearance of Bianche Lamont?” “Yes, sir.” ““Where and when?” “On the evening of April 10 on the way home from church.” “What was said?”’ “He remarked how sad it was that she had completely disappeared. We both expressed our willingness to help search for her.’ “‘Did you ever accompany Durrant on such & search?” “No, sir.” : d he ever tell you of having searched for . No, sir. “Was there a prayer-meeting on the evening of April 107 “Yes, s “Were you present?”’ “I did not get there till it was over.” “Did you have any conversation with Dur- rant about the disappearance of Blanche Lamont between the time vou left him on April 3 and when you walked home with him on the 10th?” “No, sir.” *‘What time did you leave the church that evening?” “*About 9 o'clock.” “Who made the first remark?"’ 1 think I did.” “I can’t remember.’ “Did you discuss this conversation with Dur- rantatihe jail?” “I don’t think so—except he asked me if I remembered it.” “D1d you repeat the conversation to him at that time?” “I think not.” “What is your best recollection of the con- versations you had with him in the jail?"” “Hz asked me if I remembered seeing him in the chureh on the Sunday after the 3d of April.” “Did you remember?”’ ¢Yes. “Did he ask you nuvthlns else?” “I don’t recall that he did.” “Your memory is a blank as to that?” Deuprey—\We object to that. The court—The objection is overruled. Witness—I can’t remember. “When were you in the church prior to the he day before.” Were there workmen in the church then?” Yes, sir; fixing the gas.” Durrant there while you were there on the 2d? “No, sir.” “How long were you there?” “Two hours.” “Then when Durrant told you he had been upstairs fixing the gas burners you knew they had been fixed the day before by the work- Hent “Yes, sir.”” “Did you remark that to Durrant?” “I don’t remember having done so.” “Was there a prayer meeting on the evening of Wednesday, April 37" “Yes, sir.”’ “Were you and Durrant both tHere?” “Yes, sir.” 1Did you have any conversation with him then?” “I remarked to him that the smell of gas had disappeared.” g the chureh?” “Is there a looking-glass in “Yes, sir; in the classroom." “Did you two go there that afternoon?” “Durrant did. I did not.” “Why did he go to the glass?"” “To see how pale he was.”” “Did be say anything about his appear- ance?” “‘He asked me if his eyes were congested and if he were very pale.” “What did you say?” “I'said they were.” Juror Dution—May I ask & question, your Honor? The court—Certainly. Juror Dutton—When you went into the library closet to see if the gas was escaping did you find that it was escaping? Witness—No; it was escaping. Barnes—On the day before, when you were in the church, did you smell gas? “I don't remember that.” “Did you notice anything the matter with the chandelier in the lobby?” “I did not.” “Where did you smell the gas?” «I think I smelled it all over the church.” “Was it after he took the bromo seltzer that he went to the mirror?” “Yes, sir; just before we carried down the organ “Was the smell of gas strongest in the lobby ?” “Yes, sir.” “Did it make you feel sick?” «No, sir.”” “Did it make you faiut, or affect you so that you wanted a bromo seltzer?" “No, sir.”" “Did you look to see if vour eyes were con- gested and your face pale?” “No, sir.” This concluded the main examination, and Mr. Deuprey picked ug the thread of his cross-questioning at the point where Mr. Barnes left off. Only a few questions were asked, one about the front door being unbarred when witness entered, and another about the gas smelling stronger in the lobby because witness had just come in from the fresh air. Then the noon recess was taken. R THE AFTERNOON SESSION. A Long and Comparatively Uninter- esting Cross-Examination of George King. The afternoon’s session opened with,| King again upon the stand. His cross-ex- amination was not finished when Judge Murphy at a quarter to 4 announced that one of the jurors had important business, and that he would therefore ad journ court. The cross-examination was, in comparison to that of other witnesses, very uninter- esting, and referred mostly to Durrant’s movementsin the church after the witness first saw him. Deuprey began: “Do I understand you to say when you were practicing some church music you heard a noise over by the foiding-doors?” “I can’t say I heard & noise.” “But something prompted you to look over lhe\pilno toward the folding-doors?” “Yes." “And there you saw Durrant?” “Yes, sir.”” He ¢ame from the pastor's room?” 0, he came up the middle aisle.” Vas there anything disarranged about his clothes?” «He was a little pale?” *Yes, sir.”” ‘Was his hair as it is now?” No, it was long in front.” ‘Now when he spoke to you didn’t he say he was sick at the stomach from gas?” “I don’t remember exactly what he said.” ““He didn’t use any such language as that he was overcome, did he?” “No, sir.”” “And he asked you to get him some bromo seltzer, and you took the money and went out?” “Yes, sir.” ““And when the platform? “I'am not certain.” Deuprey then read from the testimony of the witness before Police Judge Conlan, in which he said that when he came back with the bromo seltzer he thought he saw Dar- rant in the main vestibule. The witness said such was his testimony. “‘Do you want to be understood that any per- son at any time has asked you to change your testimony since that time?” asked Deuprey pointedly. “Did Durrant ever ask you todo so? No, sir.” you came back he was lying on o, sir.’’ Did General Dickinson?” o, sir.” “Did Mr, “Did any one at any time?” “ Ve that the only i “Was that the only time you saw him at chorch on AprlSF e “No, sir.” “When did you see him?'* “In the evening.” “I mean during the daytime.” “No, sir. That was the only time I saw him during the day.” “That was the only time?” “Yes, sir.” e “And then it was at that time you found him lying on the platform?’ t must have been.” ‘After you brought the bromo seltzer you went into the vestibule, and there saw Durrant :11:7!’? the bromo seltzer with water and drink “Yes, sir.” “Did it settle his stomach?” “I don’t think it did.” “Then after he took the bromo seltzer where did you go?” “We went into another room.” “‘And it was there that you had the conversa- um; lbfll‘l‘! bringing the cabinet organ down?” “Yes, sir.” “For whom was it to be brought down?"” “For me.” «And why was it to be brought down?” «“Because the giano was to be brought up in its place, ard I wanted to practice upon the rgan.’” g 5\{0\: both went upstairs together to where “Yes, sir.” «“How many turnsare therein the stairway?” “Five, I believe.” «Andthe turns are quite sharp?” “Yes; quite sharp.” “Can you recollect about the number of steps from the clussroom to the loft?” I couldn’t say.” “Do you mean that you took this organ down ps of the ¢ urch?” asked the court. Mr. Deuprey once more read from his transcript of the former testimony, where King has said he had requested Durrantto assist him down with the organ. The wit- ness could not remember whether or not he had said so. «“These facts were much fresher in your mind then than they are now, are they not?” asked Deuprey. “Yes, sir.” «And to the best of your knowledge such was your testimony?” “Yes, sir.” The witness then described how he and Durrant had carried the organ down from upstairs. They had found it a pretty heavy weight, and had bad some difliculty in getting it round the turns in the stair- way. The witness had no idea of the time it took to get it down. After the organ was downstairs and mn position they rested a few minutes and then went home. Then more testimony given at the pre- liminary examination was read to_ the witness. He had said he had seen Dur- rant coming from the folding-doors; his vest was all buttoned and his_collar and necktie were in perfect order. The witness had testified that he had spoken first, but he did not remember what he had said. Then Durrant said something about the gas making him feel faint, and the witness had then told how he had gone after the bromo seltzer. Kinfi said that such was his testimony, and that it was correct. He then went on to testify how he and Durrant had gone into the Jibrary and had found the door locked. In the library King had seen Durrant’s coat and hat lying on a chair. The witness was then asked what conversation had taken place between himself and Durrant on the way home, but_he counld not remember any- thing which had been said. He was asked about the putting of new locks upon the library door, and the reason for it. He said it was because chalk, books, etc., were missed from the room, and a boy was sus- pected of stealing them. The sun burners of the church then claimed attention. There are five of them, the witness said. Durrant, he said, had frequently fixed the gas fixtures and had often called upon him to assist. “In reference to the two Lamont girls, you and Durrant used to accompany them home from the Sunday evening services?” then asked Deupre “Yes, sir.” “You offered your services. when the two yourg ladies were alone?” “Not particularly on that account.” Sometimes you went with Miss Maud and sometimes with Blanche?” ot often.” “But sometimes?” “Yes, sir.” “And did Mr. Durrant ever seem anything but respectful to the young ladies?” “No, sir.” «“Wes ever any exception teken to anything he had said or done?"! “No, sir.” “The subject of the disappearance of Blanche Lamont was first brought up by you in speake ing to Durrant?”’ T don’t remembel “sut didn’t you s ‘expressed sorrow at her disappearance, anda willingness to assist in finding her *Yes, F\ixr." 50 to Mr. Barnes?” «I don’tknow."” “When were you first interviewed by the de- tectives?” “On the day Blanche Lamont was found.” +On Sunday, April 147" “‘Yes, sir.” “Who were the detectives?” “Captain Lees and Chief Crowley.” “Where was {12 “In the Chief’s office.” Then followed a number of questions as to how the witness came to be summoned to the Chief’s office, and who was with him; and he told how he was taken before Chief Crowley and was questioned as to the things he had seen. He said he had been questioned by Captain Lees since the examination in the Police Court. This in- terview was held in the City Hall, and he had been sent for then by Detective Sey- mour. On one occasion he said Seymour had said to him that he had better not talk to any one of the defense, as he had been subpenad. “Why did he tell you that?” asked Deu- prey vehementlv. Barnes objected and the court allowed the obgectim\, as it called for an opinion from the witness. The witness said, how- ever, that Seymour had told him it would be much better if he would not talk to the defense. The witress had not seen any one of the defense until long after he gave his statement to the police. A recess of ten minutes was then de- clared, and at its conclusion Deuprey once more took up his examination. The wit- ness was asked who had the keys to the side door of the church. He answered that Durrant, Mrs. Moore, Mr. Gibson, the janitor and himself had key. He and the janitor were the only ones who had keys to the front door, he said; the Wolfs had not keys to either door. There were no articular hours for any of those having Eeys to visit the church, but it was the general custom for any one who had keys and who had business there to go in the afternoon. The Judge here announced that as one of the jurors had important business to attend to he would adjourn court. Deu- prey said he would finish his cross-examin. ation in a very short time, but he was told it must go over, and so the case was con- tinued until to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. HE DD NOT DESPAR Report That Durrant Broke Down Over Mrs. Crosett’s Testimony Untrue. Neither Side Likely to Profit by the Memorles of Durrant’s Class~ mates. Toadd to the great number of utterly unfounded stories that have been pub- lished concerning the Durrant case and the defendant himself, only to be contra- dicted the next day or to have them proven untrue by some other publication, a morning paper printed-yesterday a state- ment that Durrant had broken down the evening after Mrs. Crosett had given her testimony on the witness-stand, and that for the first time the prisoner had lost his wonderful self-control and had shed tedrs in his despair. A As a matter of fact Durrant did nothing of the sort, if the statements of those who were near him at the time can be reiied upon. Besides others who were present at the time Durrant is alleged to have given way, and who have made statements to the same effect, Chief Jailer Satler is authority for a statement directly the opposite to the published account. S Mr. Satler is a very vigilant officer, who watches his]priuoner much more closely than is usually the case and might reason- ably be expected, therefore, to note more quickly than another person any change in the conduct ofa prisoner in his custody. According to him Durrant has never shawn the least perceptible diversion from the calm, self-contained deportment that has characterized his actions since he was first imprisoned and that has marked his reception of any new evidence of his guilt. The story was merely another of the many that have been published of Iate cal- culated to aid in convicting the prisoner before the jury’s verdict is reached. From present indications neither the prosecution nor the defense will profit to any great extent when the classmates of Durrant at Cooper College are called to testify, As yetnooneof thestudents of