The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, September 26, 1895, Page 5

Page views left: 0

You have reached the hourly page view limit. Unlock higher limit to our entire archive!

Subscribers enjoy higher page view limit, downloads, and exclusive features.

Text content (automatically generated)

THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1895. 5 MR, DEUPREY POINTS 10 PASTOR GIBSON Durrant Tries to Cast| Suspicion on the Clergyman. A CHISEL IN THE STUDY. | The Senior Counsel for the Defense Makes a Dra- matic Speech. AN ALIBI FOR THE PRISONER. Mrs. Durrant Says Theodore Wore Dark Trousers—Durrant May Testify. AL IN A MINUTE-THE SE THE DURRANT 1is opening statement for of Theodore Durrant, er of Blanche Lamont, and at its conclusion the endant took the witness- Mr. Deu the defen: charged wi yesterday iree of the people’s witnesses— Hallett, Detective Gibson and briefl xamined. Mr. Deuprey claimed & com- Durrant,. and said that Dr. 11d testify that the defendant was lecture at the Cooper Medical fternoon of April 3. be would attack the char- L. he people’s witness He Ler that the suspiclon was stronger Pestor Gibson than against the pris- He intimated that the defendant might 1f take the stana Durrant told some of the familv history. e said Theodore was born at Toronto, Can- a, and that his s studying in ar ch attendant house on the morning of the 3d he was dressed all in & dark suit of clothes, she said. Reynolds was cross He had always been a Sergeant s study, and said the chisel the marks on the jamb of the door lead- to the belfry. He was still on the stand rned till this morning. er, Maud, was at present | When he left the | the next witness, | 1in the toolbox | of the lecture, and they are unlike those taken by any other student present.” It was after 5 o’clock when Durrant reached Emmanuel Church. Then he went to work to fix the sun burners. Mr. | Deuprey detailed at great length just | bow Durrant fixed the sun burners, After Durrant left the church, on his way home, he met alady and conversed with her concerning the evil effects of the gas he had been overcome by in the church. Then Mr. Deuprey went outside of the evidence and pointed the finger of suspi- cion, in most dramatic manner, at the pas- tor of Emmanuel Church. The chisel marks on the belfry door fitted the chisel found in Pastor Gibson's tool chesg, and the letters on the wrapper around the rings were like the letters in the pastor’s address book. There was only a suspicion against Durrant, he said, and an equally strong even a stronger suspi- cion against Pastor Gibson. Last of all Durrant’s good character up o an inch.’ “Was it opened when you reached the Morgue?” “I couldn’t say that.” Mrs. Leak was then recalled. She was questioned closely concerning her eye- sight, concerning the blinds on her win- dows, concerning the oculist from which she once purchased a pair of glasses. She maintained stoutly that her eye- sight was good and strong. She had not been in the East for sixteen years, she said, and had never had her eyes exam- | ined for any trouble. Then she was per- | mitted to depart and Mr. Deuprey arose to | make his opening statement to the jury. | _ After repeating the quotation from Lord | Cowper “that the wisdom and justice of our laws are no more noticeable than in | the perspicuity and clearness required 1n | establishing the guilt or innocence of a | prisoner on_ trial for his life,’’ he declared hat America, among all nations, gloried | in her standard that requir-d positive evi- t dence of the most convincing kind before a verdict of euilty could be invoked against a defendant. *‘No innuendoes, no surmises nor premises may be admitted,” ‘ said the counsel. Then he turned his | attention to circomstantial evidence, speaking as follows: In this case the entire testimony afforded by | the prosecution is entirely circumstantial—an indirect mode of testimony which leads often | to wrong results. It has been said that circumstances cannot lie. While this may be true, witnesses can lie, —It you wish only to N YTE TO THE READE) rant case yesterda: e you that information. the foreg it is your desire to learn the particulars interesting trial you clear, i vill find subjoined a partial account of all im- | der no circumstances will | details be admitted. They are to an intelligent understanding | ss of the case, and will be accorded | place in these column: | — THE FIFTEENTH DAY. suecinet, 1 | | | Deuprey’s Opening Speech—The Ac- cusation Against the Pastor—Mrs. Durrant on the Stand. Doubtless, if the defense makes perfectly | good, by reliable testimony, all that its senior attorney has claimed for Durrant he | ted. But— speculation as to the result of t cease. Itis too lateaday. the prosecution hasclosed and the | fense made a fair beginning. What the or can prove will soon be known. The witnesses are already testifying. Mr. Deuprey made his speech to the jury yesterday mor! before a crowded and somewhat fashionable audience. Never | had an attorney an audience that listened : more attentively, more eagerly, to every | word that fell from his lips. Scoresof | spectators were content to stand and listen | and not another spectator could possibly have been crowded into the room. There | was even a larger percentage of ladies present than usual, and that many of | them were members of what is called San | Francisco's exclusive set was apparent. At least vou could find most of their names in the Blue Book. Mr. Deuprey began his intensely forensic address with a pat quotation from Lord Cowper about the safeguards of the law, or something to that effect, and ended it th a most dramatic, impassioned appeal | for the jury to acquit his client. | His aadress throughout was an argu- | ment rather than a statement, and District | Attorney Barnes failing to interpose an | objection to the argnmentative style! Juage Murphy himself thought it neces- sary to call Mr. Deuprey’s attention to the fact that the practice is at this time to | make merely a statement to the jury, | leaving the arguments for the closing speeches. Mr. Denprey accepted the court’s sugges- tion gracefully, albeit with a dexterously put phrase which maintained his own | belief that Judge Murphy was in the| wrong. «“The most essential elements to this case are lacking in the proof offered by the prosecu- tion,” said Mr. Deuprey. *“Where did Blanche Lamont forfeit her life? When did Blanche Lamont meet her death? By whose hand was she slain? «Months have passed and no answer comes | to these questions. There is a strange silence on the part of the prosecution concerning them. A fourth question has not been an- gwered. What caused the death? +And a fifth question has not been answered, | will be | and we claim never can be answered: Where | € was the motive for this defendant to take the | life of Blanche Lamont? : «“And because these vital questions are un- answered we claim that we would be justified at this time to ask the court to ajsmiss the | charge against this young man without further testimony and to scquit him of this terrible charge.” But Mr. Deuprey had reasons for not : taking this simple and direct course. He | thought it was the duty of the courtto | first hear Durrant in his own defense. The | prisoners lips would now be unsealed. | “He will tell you where he was and what | he was doing that afternoon,”’ said Mr. | Deuprey, and, he added, with marked significance, “he will be corroborated. And then, “piece by piece we shall tear the mask of falsehood from the witnesses | of the prosecution.” He said he would prove the character of | Martin Quinlan, Witness Clark, Witness | Phillips and Pawnbroker Oppenheim. And though he did not say it in so many words the inflection sof his voice meant that these characters would be shown to | be unreliable. He would prove thet Durrant did not wear light trousers on the 3d of April, but was dressed all in black. He would prove that Durrant never wore an overcoat in the ; daytime, and that therefore it must have been somebody else whom Mrs. Vogel saw waiting outside of the Normal School. Then as to the alibi. The defendant would testify that he spent the afternoon at Cooper Medical College, and Dr. Cheney would testify that Durrant was present at his lecture which began at half past 3. More than that,” said Mr. Deuprey, im- pressively, “we will show Durrfmt’l notes THE RLV. THE CCURSE OF HIS sP&EC |“WE WILL SHOW YOU THAT THEY ARE LETTERS WRITTEN BY JOEN GEORGE GIBSON,” SAID MR. DrUPREY IN H TO THE DURRANT JURY. to the moment of his arrest would shown by reputable witnesses, Mr. Deupr d, and then he made a dramatic perora- tion and sat down. It was a good speech. It proved the ability of the senior counsel for the defense but in itself it did not disprove Durrant's guilt. Mrs. Durrant took the stand. clearly and unhesit Mr. Dickinson’s questions. some of the family history and told of the defendant’s standing in the church and of his industrious habits. She said he was dressed entirely in a dark suit of clothes when he left the house on the morning of April 3. This was in contraaiction to the testi- mony of the witnesses who saw Durrant with Blanche Lamont that afternoon, all of whom said he wore light trousers. Sergeant Reynolds came next to tell of the chisel he found in the toolbox in the pastor’s study. This chisel fitted the marks made on the casing of the door leading to the belfry. He was still on the stand when court adjourned till this morning. She spoke THE MORNING SESSION. Mr. Deuprey Becomes Dramatic In His Opening Address, and Claims an Alibl for Durrant. Mr. Deuprey was absent when the court convened in the morning and Judge Thompson took the vacant seat next to Attorney Dickinson for the time and as- sisted, by his proximity at least, in the cross-examination of Detective Gibson, who had been recalled to tell something more about the blocks he found under or at the side of the body of Blanche Lamont. «“Were you a witness at the Coroner's in- ?" began Dickinson. was."! t the time you were near the head of the n the qum.m of the beliry and dis- d the dy did you see the hatchet think not. It was after that, on the second or third time I went into the belfry that I found the hatchet.” “In what condition was the hatchet, as to its being rust “About the same as it is now.” At the inquest did you not testify that when you went into the belfry, after you and Officer Reihl had broken open the door, yon went u stairs and saw the body lying there with blocks of wood beside it to keep 1t in place and a hatchet at the feet?” “I suppose I testified that way, but Iam not certain which time it wes that I saw the hatchet.” “Do you know Mr. Marshall, & CalL reporter?” “No, sir.” Do 'you recollect saying to him in an inter- view that you veliry floor th by a No. 8 or No. 9 shoe?” 1do not; I pever made such a statement.” “Were you at the house of the defendant’s arents on Monday, April 15, with Sergeant urke, making examinations of the defend- ant’s clothing?” “Yes, sir.” “Who was present?” “The defendant’s mother.” *Wasn't there & young lady present, Miss Thompson?” “There may have been.” “Didn’t she ask you about finding the body?” “That is possible; I am not sure.” +And didn’t you' state to her that you saw footprints of an 8 or 9 shoe?” I did not.” “Was such & statement made in your pres- ence? ot to my recollection.” Did you have a conversation with Officer Reihl about the footprints?”’ “Idid not.” There was no redirect examination by Mr. Barnes, and Deputy Coroner Hallett was called. “When you were in the belfry and first saw the body was the mouth open or closed?” “rdidn’t notice that until I got the body down in the hall, Then I noticed that the mouth was open.” “Very slightly open?” aw footprints ir: the dust on the appeared to e been made be | in answer to | She recited | and from whom do you get your circumstances if they do not come frum the witnesses? The judgment of a man for a erime such as is charged in this case—the crime of murder—is | one of the most important thatis left within the duty of our citizens, and the intelligence to | discriminate between improper inferences and suspiejons is indeed a great and heavy burden placed upon you gentlemen. The importance of the office of juror cannot be overestimated, and every citizen called to assume itshould be furnished with every means to fill his duty. The utmost caution must be | exerei by those called on to serve in such | an important case. Eensational articles should | not influence. The greatest caution should be exercised in trying man for his life. Publi- cations and talks with friends should not in- fluence. The mindsof the jury should be in & prover state to receive impre | * This jury has been carefully seleeted. Your views on’ecircumstantial evidence and your fnith in the law that requires that you shall consider the defendant innocent until he 1s proved guilty qualified you to sit in this case, From the manner in which the prisoner at the bar has been written up and spoken of, your ability in this courtroom and under in: structions will be put to a severe test. We trust that in this case you will rest solely upon the establishment of a custom wherein the burden of proof necessary to con- vict lies totally with the prosecution. The learned District Attorney outlined for you what he claimed would be sufficient to satisfy vour minds of the guilt of Theodore Durrent. He has skillfully prodaced a very strong case o! circumstantial evidence whic! at first would create a very strong suspicion of the guilt of the defendant. Suspicion is to be distingoished from proof. One thousand suspicions do not form one proof. We claim and shall claim that beyond a strong suspicion the prosecution has failed togo. We claim that the most powerful and potential elements of proof necessary to con- Vict are entirely lacking. We contend that with all the testimony in- troduced the only issues to be passed on guve not been answered. Where did Blanche La- mont forfeit her life? When did she meet her death? Who caused her death? Thase questions, in brilliant letters, have been before the eyes of the world since April 14, 1895. Months have passed away and no answer comes. Silence on the part of the prosecntion on these vital and only issues causes the query, Where, when and who? There is a fourth ques- tion which has not been issued, we contend, and that is the cause of death. A fifth question has not been answered, and it never can be answered: Where was the mo- tive, what was the motive of the accused to take the life of Blanche Lamont? No, never has it been answered, and we again reiterate that it will never be answered. Under the viewof the testimony thus far given, we believe and claim to ask the court at the time to instruct the jury without one word to acquit. We think, however, as a duty to William H. T. Durrant, his parents and the community that his lips nhou?d be unsealed. You are entitled to know and shall know where he was and what he did on Apnl 3, 1895, from the time he arose in the morning until he went to his rest at night. It is & trite seying, which bears the impress of truth, that one story is good until another is told. You have heard what the prosecution claims was done on that momentous day. His story shall be told and link by link we shall tear the mask of falsenood from the faces of the witnesses for the State. In making the opening statement for the de- fense it is right to call attention to the state- ments of the State's prosecuting officer and to | show wherein he has failed to make his prom- ises good: “We will show you that he was not where he caght to have been on the day that he met Bianche Lamont; that he was notat the Cooper Medical College at Dr. Cheeney’s lecture. We will show that at the taking of this rollcall no particular attention is given to it by the professors. We will show you that upon that day Durrant was not at his plac that is, sitting in alphabetical order among the students. Durrant was absent.” Where is the Emon Echo answers, where? The prosecution has called between forty and fifty witnesses. Of that number ten have given materia! evidence. Three elderly ladies, three {olmg ladies, a_pawnbroker, a Victoria hotel- eeper, a Police Court shyster and his colleague have furnished the substantial testimony upon which the prosecution relies. We shali deal with these at the proper sea- son. We insist that the proper pl’onrll wantin, to connect the defendant with the murder of Blanche Lamont. We are not here to furnish surprises nor sensations. We will show that other men had access to the Emmannel Baptist Church. We will show you every movement of the defendant on the day most in question, Proof may point to others, while we unravel the skeins of evidence, yet at this moment no specific indictment wiil be made. Yet at this pointlet me carry you along the ground upon which we shell ask from you a verdict for the defense. First, we shall ask you to hear from the I :hq;me plainly—about three-quarters of | noble, devoted, all-loving mother, who never has, who never can lose faith in her boy. From her you shall know that W. H. T. Dur- rant and this wife were united June 30, 1870, in marriage, and amid Christian surround- ings, in a Christian home, this son was born to them. You shall know when the family arrived here, about the latter part of 1879. You shall be informed how the prisoner became inter- ested in church work. We will tell you what he did for the Emmanuel Baptist Church. We will tell you how he met Blanche Lamont, and vou shall be told of his associations with her. You shall hear from the lips of Mrs. Durrant how her son was dressed when he left his home on the morning of April 3, 1895. You shall know where the mother saw him next, and what transpired in the evening, ‘The good repute and honorable character of the defendant will be proven. The attendance at the Coo?er Medical College will be shown; his general demeanor will be shown. We will answer the question, “What did Dur- rant do on the morn of April 3, 1895.” He left his home and walked toward the house of George King, so that he might have a helper that evening to fix the gas. We will show that on the corner of Twenty-ninth and Mission streets he accidentally met Blanche Lamont. We will show that he told her he was on the way to King's house and asked her to accom- pany him, but she said that as the time was growing late she did not have the time to go With him and requested Durrant to accompany her 1o school. This he acquiesced in, and took the car with her to Mission and Ninth. They transferred to the Larkin-street branch, and aeain transferred at Sutter and separated. Miss Lamont went on to0 ner school, while the defendant went west to Wehster street, where he got off the car and went to the Cooper Medical College. We wiil show you what he did from his ar- rival there untilthe noon hour,when he walked northerly on Webster street to Broadway and westerly to a point where he and a student could sit and gaze over the bay. We will show you his return to college at half-past 1, and what was done from half-past 1 till 3:30 at the Cooper College; that he wentto Dr. Cheney’s jecture, and wi!l produce his notes, different from any other student’s, and thathe is marked resent, and also Dr. Cheney will tell you that f6 Was present. We willshow you thai he took the Sutter-street cars to Polk, to Mission and Ninth, out Mission and thence to the church, and alone did be walk into the church. We will show u he arrived at the church at five minutes to 5, and not before, that he en- tered by the door on the south side, that he went into the library in regard to a book and a card he wanted. Heremoved his coat, neatly folded it, took out his watch, so that it would not fall out while he was ng the gas jets, felt if he had the nippers. He went to the easter)y end, retraced Lis steps and went up to the ceiling by way of the ladder through the hele in the céiling. He then went and fixed the sunburners. We will show the construction of these sun- borners, that it is distinctly separate from the rest—that is to say, that the only work required zas fitters was to fit on tips, seventy-two lhat they turned on the gas, that went out and that a considerable leak was thus encountered. We will show to you under these circum- stances that as a natural result the rooms would be filled with gas, and we will show you that owing to lack of ventilation, when Theo- dore Durrant went to the ceiling. he was over- come by the gas that had arisen. We will show you he leaned down on the papers spread by the sunburners. He removed three plates, and put his head down through. At this time the current was turnédd on. He felt that the amount of gas was affecting him. He with- drew his head, rearranged the sunburners and cut off the supply. This caused him #o feel sick, as stated by George King, who was playing a loud piano for three minutes, and you are asked to believe that this man accused of the murder went directly down to secure & witness to his crime. Is it possible? We will show that Durrant then was on the platiorm, lying down, and when King re- turned went down to the kitchen to take the seltzer. We will show that upon the request of King he went upstairs to get the cabinet organ. We will show you the size and weight of the organ, and that a person carrying it down from the rear his feet would be continually struck. We will show you the number of stairs and turns. That at ‘last they brought the organ into the Sunday-school room. Then Durrant and King went to the library; the door was locked, as Mr. King has told you. Durrant put ou his coat and hat and they left the church together, it being George King’s dinner time; the defendant walked a ways with him. We will show that afterleaving King he met a lady acquaintance, who asked him how he was, and that he told her how that after fixing the gas he had been taken a little sick. How he went home and ate his evening meal with his parents, after which he went to the church entertainment. This_will be the simple story of the defend- ant. He will be corroborated by those who know him well and who will give reasons why their statements are correct, and we will then turn our attention to some evidence found in that church. We will show that the marks upon the belfry door show the marks of a chisel. and that the chisel found in the pestor’s study in & toolbox formed them. We will show you, as long as they have intro- duced a paper here with letters on it, as com- pared with letters found in Emmanuel Baptist Church, that they are letters written by the Rey. John George Gibson. 1f we are to act upon suspicions, if we are to be placed in the position you are, by asking you to believe a chain of circumstantial evi- dence that cannot be supported, then we will show you that there are others who have been cast into suspicion and worse than the de- fendant. We will ask you, gentlemen of the jury, to ether or not these young ladies can ¢ be correct, or are they not partially mis- Remember, none of them ever saw the defendant untit the afternoon of April 3, 1895. Remember that these matters are celled dis- tinctly to their attention by photographs in the newspapers, and_ that by the most inhu- man, ontrageous and uncivilized methods per- mitted at the City Prison they are brought to identify a man—the subject of all this unright- eous notoriety. These two young ladies who say they saw this man on a car—they tell you they were walking southerly on Powell street and that the car on which’ this man was riding was go- ing the same direction. They say all they saw of this young man was from the nose down. Judge Murphy—Mr. Deuprey, I must say that you are exceediug your rights. You are now Qiscussing the testimony of the prosecution. Our Supreme Court has decided that the open- ing statement is for the purpose of setting forth what is expected to be proved. The closing statement is for the purpose of discussing testi- mony. Denprey—I bow to the court, and T will t 1 have no desire to exceed my rights. entlemen of the jury, we will show to Now, you that on the morning of April3, 1895, When Durrant left his house he was attired entirely in a dark suit of clothes. We call at- tention to the pants in particular in the Vogel testimony. Then it was that the witness Vogel spoke of noticing light pants. We will call at- tention to the time Mrs. Crosett must have taken in traversing the distance as testified to by her. That the time necessary for that trip is fully fifty-five or fifty-eight minutes, and we will show by expert testimony that impaired circulation, especiaily in old persons, will affect the vision. We will show that the time of a person crossing in front of the windows in front of the church is about eighteen seconds and perhaps seventeen seconds. We will introduce evidence to show that Mrs. Leak has failed to recognize her own lady ac- uaintauces; that she has fniled to recognize frs. Durrant and has excused hersell. We will show the same failure of sight has been made by Mrs. Crieett. We will introduce evi- dence to show tne reputation of Martin Quin- lan. We will deal with David Clark in the same way. When it comes to the pawnbroker, Oppen- heim, we will show that he did have a conver- sation, but not with W. H. T. Durran., for we will show to you that W. H.T. Durrant never wore a long coat in the daytime, We will show you the man on the stand with the long overcoat wlth . velvet collar, a soft hat, and he will tell you that he went to Op- penheim’s store with this ring (exhibiting a ring introduced by the defense, resembling the ring that belonged to Blanche Lamont); that he tried to sell it, but did not succeed, and that ne left in the direction which witnesses claim Durrant took. * We will show you the reputation of Oppen- heim and also of Mr. Phillips, and his reputa- tion for veracity and integrity, and now, gen- tlemen, when it was submittéd here, when the District Attorney closed his address, he as- serted that if he could prove that which he said he could do, he would take it upon him- self to secure a verdict that the defendant would be sentenced, and that the defendant wonld he hanged by the neck till he was dead. 1f the District Attorney could prove the de- fendant guilty of the heinous crime of which he is charged every citizen, yea the attorneys for thé deiense, would join ina demand that he be hanged by the neck nntil he is dead, and if the law allowed I would join ina demand that he be quartered, 1f we can prove what we have outlined now we should have the spirit of Blanche Lamont to fall upon you to realize the truth, and if her spirit could come before you now we believe it would say, “Let the defendant stand out; let him be free, for he harmed me not.” W. H.T. Durrant is innocent. We stand for his life; we demand his liberty. There was a ten minutes’ recess taken at the conclusion of Mr. Deuprey’s address, and when it was over Mr. Dickinson said: “Mrs. Durrant, take the stand, please.” She gave her name as Isabella Mathilda Durrant and said she was born and mar- ried at Toronto, Canada. William Henry Theodore and his sister Maud were born in Toronto, and seventeen years ago last De- cember the family removed to California, Maud, the only daughter, was now study- ing in Berlin, where she had gone in Feb- ruary last. ¥ Some other partsof the family history were gone over. They had lived on Haight street and on Twelfth street and now at 1025 Fair Oaks street. Theodore first went to a private school in Toronto, and has been at school since his residence here. During vacations he worked in stores or did electrical work for various persons. Last Christmas, during the vacation, he worked at the Goiden Rule Bazaar. “Do you know of his hnvln’ done electricai work at Emmanuel Church?” ’ “I know of his being interested in the elec- trical work there and of nis paying a good deal of attention toit.” Barnes—I move to strike out the answer as not responsive to the question.” The court—Oh, I will let it remain. “Do you know of his working for a Mr. Bunker, doing electric-work?” “Yes, sir.” At this point the noon recess was taken. IS e THE AFTERNOON SESSION. Testimony About the Chisel That Was Found In the Pastor’s Study—Durrant’s Clothes. In the afternoon Mr. Dickinson pro- ceeded with the main examination of Mrs. Durrant. She said the defendant was a graduate of Lincoln High School and sub- sequently of the Polytechnic School. From this point Mr. Dickinson led the “Please describe it?” “A dark cutaway coat and vest.” “Are the trousersof the same color as the coat?” “No, sir?” “Are they lighter or darker?” “Lighter.” “What was the other suit?” ‘All dark.” “That is all.” Mr. Dickinson—Was this suit that Mr. Dur- “Yes, sir.” Sergeant Charles L. Reynolds was called. He said be first visited Emmanuel Church at1 o’clock Sunday morning, April 14, and again at about noon the same day. He noticed chisel marks on the door of the belfry and the lock on the door bore marks of having been ‘*‘jimmied.”” There were also marks on the doorframe. Two days afterward he made a searclr of the church for tools. “Did you find a chisel?’’ he was asked. 1did.” Where did you find it?” I first saw it in the hands of a young man named McCreevy.” “Where did he get it?” “1 saw him pick it up in the pastor’s study.” J?:;{%Smylhe—\'ou saw him pick it up? “Iid) «I now show you a chisel and ask you if you can identify it?"” asked Dickinson. “I can’t be sure about that. It bears the same resemblance. I think it is.” “Where in the pastor's study was the chisel found ?” H “In a toolbox in the corner.” “Were there other tools in it?” ““Yes, sir.” MRS. ISABELLA MATHILDA DURRANT AS A WITNESS FOR HER SON. witness into the business of her husband at Toronto. Judge Murphy interposed an objection here and said that although he desired to | allow the fullest inquiry he hardly thought it material to go into such matters. The time of the jury should not be taken up in useless inquiries. Mr. Dickinson then led the witness to say that tho defendant had been a mem- ber of Emmanuel Church for five y Prior to that he attended Grace Metho Episcopal Church and Sund~y-school and | also Trinity Church and the one presided over by I. S. Kalloch at Metropolitan Temple. Defendant ulso had a newspaper route for several years. “Do yon know whether the defendant had money in the bank on Aprii 37" “Yes, sir; he had.” s ut the present time?"” *Yes, 8ir. “At what hour did you have breakfast on April 37 YAt half past 7.” “Who was present at breakfast?” {r. Durrant, Theodore and myself.” How was the defendent dressed that day?” “He wore a dark blue suit.”” Witness was then shown a pair of dark trousers, which Mr. Dickinson called “pants,”’ and Mrs. Durrant identified them as having been worn by Theodore on the 3d of April. She also identified a coat and Vest which she testified was worn by the defendant on that day. These garments were offered in evidence, and then Mr. Dickinson asked : “‘How many members of the family are there at your home?” “Mr. Durrant, Theodore, & young man named Joseph Browder and myself.” vas there a servant at that time?"” 'No, sir.”” “Did you care for the defendant’s clothes?” ¢“Yes, sir.”” “How was he dressed when he returned on the evening of April 3?7 “The same a8 when he left the house.” «Do you know whether at that time of the year t‘m ever wore an overcoat in the day- ime? “He did not.” At this point Juror Smythe asked to see the garments offered in evidence by Mr. Dickinson. They were accordingly passed over to the jury. “Were these made to order or ready made?” asked Juror Smythe of the witne: “They were made to order,” said Mrs. Durrant. “Do yon know who made them. I donotfind any mark on them?” “They were made by Lyonsthe tailor.” Witness then said, in answer to Mr. Dickinson’s questions, that it was Theo- dore’s custom to kiss her upon going out and coming home. On the 3d of April this custom was not apbrogated. “What time aid you have dinner that evening?” “Between quarter after and half- past 6 o'clock.”. “Was the defendant at dinner?” “Yes, sir.” “What happened after dinner?” “Theodore took me to the electric-car. Tleft him there. He said he was on his way to church.” “What time did you return?"”’ “At half-past 11 o’clock.” “Was the defendant at home then?"” “He was in his room sound asleep.” “Did you see him the next morning?” “Yes, sir.” Mr. Dickinson then asked concerning the physical condition of Durrant when he returned home on the evening of the 3d, and of the conversation his mother had with him concerning the effects of the as. ¥ Mr. Barnes objected to the declarations of the defendant, and they were notal- lowed. Witness then said that Durrant was pale and did not look well when he returned. On Monday, the 15th of April, and on the day previous the Durrant home was visited by Sergeant Burke and Detective Gibson, who searched among Durrant’s effects and clothes. Mrs. Durrant says they found a pair of shoes, which they ex- amined as to the size of the soles, and they returned them to their place. They only took away the hat and overcoat. Then came the examination of Mr. Barnes. It was brief but pointed: “Had_the defendant more then one suit of clothes?” he asked. “Yes, sir; three suits.” “Was the one he nmow wears oneof those three?” “Yes, sir.” 2 [ “‘This hammer I show you. Do you recog- nize it?” “That was found in the toolbox.” Witness then identified a photograph of the door of the beliry. He also pointed out on a diagram the location of the furniture in the pastor’s study and the place where the toolbox was found. In conclusion Mr. Dickinson asked wit- ness if Le brought aw: shoe from the church. He said that he did not. know who did?” inquired Mr. Barnes xamination. tive Gibson, I think it was.” ou go with orfollow McCreevy1nto the stor’s study when he found the chisel?” We liad both been searching there for some time, I beiteve.” “Did yon find the doors to the pastor’s study locked or unlocked: “Unlocked, I think “Did you go through both doors that day?” “Yes, sir; they were both unlocked. 1 re- member that we did not have to use any keys | at either door.” “So that anybody inside the church would haye aceess (o the room ?” “Do you remember whether the doors stood open or closed?” ““No, I don’t remember that.” Sergeant Reynolds was still on the stand when conrt adjourned until this morning. FROGS AS LIVE STOCK. Two Cases to Be Sold at Auction by the Officials of the Custom- House. Mnch perturbation was occasioned yes- terday at the Custom-house by the Pacific Mail people, who insisted that the Federal officials were the proper custodians of two cases of live frogs. The frogs were taken on the City of Rio Janeiro at Yokohama. They were to be delivered to the Hon. John Marsden at Honolulu. But the steamer did not touch atthe Sandwich Islands because of the cholera. In (‘onseguenca the frogs were brought on to San Francisco and as no one claimed them here the steamship officials insisted that the custom officers should take charge. They objected. Then the section of the law which declares that all live animals not speciallv provided for should pay a 20 per cent ad valorem duty was produced, the Naval Officer thought the frogs would be exempt. But the regulations declare specifically that the only animals ad- mitted duty free shall be those “pure bred of a recognized breed and duly registered in the book of that breed.” Asno one had a *‘frog book’ and the animals were con- sidered perishable they wi.l be sold at auc- tion this afternoon at the Mail dock. HME. A. RUPPERT'S FACE BLEACH FOR THE COMPLEXION. Removes Freckles, Pimples, Black Heads, Tan, etc. Absolutely cures Eczema and all kindred skin ailments. Price $2 per bottle, or $5 for three bottles (usually required to clear the complexion). To show that the Face Bleach is harm- less, yet beneficial, a small sample bottle sold for 25c. : A book of useful hints sent upon receipt of 10¢c in stamps. TO THOSE OUT OF TOWN, Send 35 Cents for Sample Bottle of FACE BLEACH and Book, ‘“HOW TO BE BEAUTIFUL.” CALL OR ADDRESS MME. A. RUPPERT, 26} Kearny St., Room 8, SAN FRANCISCO. Main Office—8_East Fourteenth Street, New York City, N. Y. NEW TO-DAY. Rosenthal’s Without None This Genuine Trade= Mark AACE MARK: There Are Others Who advertise “Reduction” and ‘“Clearance Sales.” They catch a few customers who do not keep track of what we're doing. The crowds come to us because of the genuineness of our Great Reductions IN Up-to-Date . Fine Shoes Additional Barga New ins KUTZ & CO extra fine Dongola button Shoes, kid or cloth tops, long pnlenl$l 8 05 leather tips, pointed or ‘. APair square toes, Inferior shoes sim!lar in style are ade vertised by competitors as a bargain at £2.50. We save you 65 cents on other dealers’ lowest prices. J. & T. COUSIN'S Ladies’ $5 stitchea heel Boots. lace or button. kid or cloth tops, reduced $3‘ 25 E S pair. id Oxfords, LADIES' FINE Dongola pointed or square toes, V shaped, patent leather 5 S 1.50 Perfect beauties in every way. Kid soft and pliable, hand sewed and free from tacks and threads, They require no “‘breaking in.” Well worth 5 50. 400 pairs LAIRD, SCHOBER & MIT- CHELL'S French Kid, haud $4.50 4.5 sewed, walking Boots, T .50, Great bargain, duced to.. Former price Our space is limited, hence we're unable toitemize our num- berless bargains. Visit our store and you'll ind every statement absolutely true. Rosenthal’s Leading and Largest Shoe House On the Coast. 107-109-111 Kearny St. Near Post. We Have No Branches. Out of town orders solicited and filled same day as received. wear well That's why they sell well. Dealers who have garried Standard Shirts twenty years tell us that they have many customers who witl have noth- ing else. If they did not wear well, that couldn’t be so. That Trade-Mark on every shirt. Neustadter Bros., Mfrs. 8. F. VIGOR o= MEN Easily, Quickly, Permanently Restored. Weakness, Nervousness, Debility, and 2ll the train of e from early errors or later excesses, the results of overwork, sickness, worry, ete. Full strength, devel- opmentand tone given to <gevery organ and portion of thebody. Simple, nat- ural methods. Immedi- ) !/| ate improvement seen. re impossible. 2.000 references. Ex.]i;ll;nlu tion and proofs mailed (sealed) free. ERIE MEDIGAL £7.. Buffalo, N.Y. and oS ~RY A SURE PREVENTIVE FOR CHOLERA. HIGHLAND SPRINGS, Lake County, Cal. A Comfortable Winter Resort at Rea- sonable Rates. Easy of Access. Altitude, 1700 feet. Pure Moun- tain Water and Air. The Best Mineral Water and Baths on Earth. EQUABLE CLIMATE—FREE FRCM ALL CHOLERAIC GERMS. THE BEST PLACE IN CALIFORNIA TO SPEND THE WINIER. ’ For full particulars call at city office, 316 Mont- gomery street, or address J. CRAIG, Manager. IVY LODGE, 117 Soquel Avenue, Santa Cruz, Cal., SELECT PRIVATE BOARDING. Large grounds, fruiws and flowers; central; class accommodations. LAUREL D&LL HOTEL, N LAUREL DELL LAKE (FORMERLY Lower Bloe Lake). A new botel—the most artistic in the county. The rush is over. Rooms can now be had and you will be treated well. Boat- ing, bathing, fishing, etc., are among the many amusements. Rates, $8 to'$12 per week. Address H. WAMBOLD, Beriha P. 0., Lake County. REDUCED RATES, At Saratoga Springs, Lake County, Cal., ACHELOR P, 0.—FOR FALLAND WINTER. Large, airy, hard-finished rooms. en suite. Ac- comme ions first-class. Ilot mineral baths. ‘Write for particulars to J. CONNER. Proprietor. OTEL DE REDWOOD—HEART OF THE Santa Cruz_Mountains; reduced rates for Sept., Oct. and Nov. Send for clreular to M, S COX! Laurel. Cal.

Other pages from this issue: