The New York herald., 1869-03-15
THE ROYAL INSURANCE BOND ROBBERY.

f ~>~>>~<~>>~~~>.>>>>>~~>
Some Further Particulars about the Pedigrecs
OF Wifnesses-Disagreement Of the Jury.
The trial or Dan Noble, the Royal Insurance bond
robber. at Emira, before the Chemung county Court
OF oyer and Termner, is exciting great interest
throughout that section or the State. The testimony
for the defence is exceedingly voluminous, and a
desperate attempt is being made to clear the
prisoner One result OF the examination Of wit
nesses his behalf is peculiar and that is that in
most cases the cross questions elicit very curious
facts concerning the pedigrees and previous occupa
,ions OF the witnesses.
In addition to the testimony reported in yester-
days HERALD, James De Witt, resident and ex-
jailer OF Elmira. aud John F. McCuey, resident OF
Williamsburg, were examined during the afternoon
session OF Friday.
De Witt testified on the direct examination that o
child or the prisoners was left in his De Wits family
by the prisoners wife in 1862; that Mrs. Noble
versed with De Witt about purchasing hou for
her; and left an advance OF 2150 with him for that
purpose IN May or June, 1885, Noble Knapp. Iierney
had very sore eyes at the time; Knapp asked Noble
II Tieney would be a good man to send down TO
settle with the company, and Noble said he thought
he would be; Knapp asked il Noble thought If
they gave him the money and sent him down II ne
tnsH se 20 ssn h oMn
heard the conversation between the men; was
not in the room; they were in the parlor;
door was open couple of inches; no such word was
said by Grilin as 81 have been told you don't mean
to DO what's right you don't r. mean s i say I 90 now;
few days.
On cross-examination he testified that he was
member OF the Chemung county bar at that time;
had been justice OF the peace prior to that time; had
kept law and pension offices; found 1t profitable
have not quit the pension business yet; am now
engaged IN the claim agent business; do pot
keep . faro bank; ! refuse to answer the
questions as to whether | have kept faro
nh In EIfS1fR Env~fo h0 n q
vile; have not abandoned the profession OF the law
for the purpose OF gambling: had known Tierney in
stolen goods knew him asa gambler; mad not heard
OF the robbery OF the Royal Insurance Company at
the time Terney was at my house; did not under
stand that these gentlemen had come from Canada:
did not understand the settlement was about
crime; did not hear Of the robbery until Noble
New York once; had been there twice; staid
at Mobiles house two days one time, and
oOer night the other ta time aae !, ahare thet WAS
no gambling at that time my wife In the family
OF the jaier at the time Of my first acquaintance with
her; her former husband was In State Prison; pro-
cured divorce for her and married her; first
learned OF her acquaintance with the Noble family In
May sc saw % MRS Noble n lsSs ae % was Mrs not Nn ea
before she was married; Mrs. Noble brought the child
to our house and my wife induced her TO leave 1t;
gambed with some OF the money Mrs. Noble LETT with
me; 1t sometimes grew bigger and sometimes smaller;
she told me to buy house for not less than 5000
more than $10,000 1t ragt have been the last OF
March when Nobie's folks came to Elmra; have
been arrested three times IN The ciry OF Emra; my
wife never left me; she hasn't ever lived with her
former husband since our marriage to my know
ledge.
Direct resumed-was arrested twice for being In a
crowd where faro was dealt and once for dealing
faro; Noble didn't go out OF the house the day that
Griffin and Knapp came 10 my house; OF least | DO
not think he did.
The testimony Of McCuey related mainly to his
acquaintance and connections with some OF the par
ties implicated in the robbery. but developed nothing
particularly interesting.
At four O'Clock saturday afternoon the case had
been summed up and the Judges charge delivered.
The jury then retired and renamed out IN delibera-
tion all night. At nine O'Clock yesterday morning
they were discharged, being unable to agree upon
verdict. II is understood that six jurors were In
favor OF ofacquittal and six for conviction.