The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1878-05-13
A CHANGE OF FROoT.
he Government Witnesses in the Day
Robbery Case Change Their Minds-The
Prisoners Held for TriaI-Signiicaut
Remarks by Judge knight.

The court room was crowded and the develop
ments in the case became more interesting as
progressed and as fitting finale Of the who'll
Judge Knight remarked Somebody has bee,
trading. Whether this remark was false O.
true can be determined by glance a
the testimony. County Attorney Libby an
peared for the government and Mr.. Sylvester
of the firm of Motley & Sylvester for tb,
polite respondents.
The reading of the warrant was waived an,
Officer Seth Sterling was called as first witness
He related the circumstance of finding then
at Alfred under arrest. They told him they
were last from Saco, and were going to New
Hampshire. They said they went from Ports
mouth to Saco. At first they refused to give
their names, and then gave them as printed
The larger of thu two refused to state why
they were on their way to New Hampshire,
| via SacO from Portsmouth. They did not adj
nit that they had ever been in Portland.
On cross.examinatiOn witness denied that
he ever told the prisoners that third man had
been captured, and they had better confess
Arthur M. Sawyer, city constable. testified
that he saw the larger prisoner the day of the
robbery about 2:2O p. N. Sawyer was driving
up Newbury towards Market street, and when
near Huli's shoe factory saw this man run
towards Mun1oy Hill in front of his horse,
within twenty feet, and up Pearl street He
was not running fast, and Mr.. Sawyer had no
suspicion at the time, but three quarters of an
hour afterwards he heard of the Iobbery, and
| gave description of the man to the Marshal
To the best of his knowledge and belief, the
larger prisoner is the man he saw.
Charles Day then testified to the robbery,
| and repeated the story that has been Published.
BE said the larger of the two prisoners resem-
bled, with the exception of his beard, the man
who asked to look at fsh-poles. That man
had no beard and the description he gave was
that of a smooth-faced man. When he identi-
fed the prisoner, he did so under excitement.
He never had told any one he had changed his
mind as to his ability to identify the prisoners
until now. He said that he never had been
approached in conversation in any way, by any
person, in regard to this matter, neither by
private detective called Chapman, nor by any,
body else with reference to restitution of the
goods He swore to this positively.
On cross.examination he said he could not
take his oath that these were the same men
who entered his store at the time of the rob-
berry. The large man was near the entrance of
the store and the light was bad.
At this point Mr.. Mayo of the PRESS was
called and testified that Mr. Day had identified
the men positively when they were arrested.
Marshal Bridges testified to the proceedings
relating to the arrest The prisoners were re-
ticent and would not answer any questions.
One of them said that to facilitate matters a
friend should be present. Friday gentleman
visited the station, bringing letter of introduce
ton from the officers in Boston. The letter
did not say who he was, but that he was de-
tective. This man gave the name of Chap
M AID ba n mo fO If
ments could be made in regard to this matter
as he wanted the prisoners in a case. Since
then the Marshal had not seen him.
On cross examination the Marshal said that
this Chapman did not intimate that he knew
the prisoners or anything about this robbery.
Sheriff Dresser testified that he held the pris-
oners in custody. Since their Incarceration at
the jail visitor named Chapman had called
upon them and registered his name. He had
called a number of times. Had seen him in
conversation with them.
J. A. Day, brother of CHARLES, testified that
he never saw the larger prisoner. The smaller
one he thought he identified, at one time, as
the man who had been in the shop Saturday
forenoon, looking at watches. That man, how
ever had no side whiskers and this one has
them. He could not identify either positively
as one of the men in the shop when the rob-
berry occurred.
Deputy Marshal Crowel testified that the
foregoing witness had said he showed the man
who was 10 the shop in the forenoon, watch,
and on his way to Days new store with some
cord. he followed the stranger who had been
reading paper SO long as far as the corner
He could not be mistaken in his identity be-
cause he suspected something was wrong at the
time.
Mr.. Sylvester said he sh ould not produce any
evidence for he did not think the governm emit
oners. He claimed that the kilograms
and descriptions at the time of the robbery
spoke Of these men as smooth-faced. They
had not been identified. No stolen property
had been found on them. Mr.. Day had testi-
fed that he did not notice whether the watches
we're in the case after IL a. m. and they were
not missed until p. m. Furthermore Mr..
Chapman's presence amounted to nothing, for
nobody denied it.
Mr.. Libby in his argument for the govern
ment said he wished to wash his hands of all
participation in any agreement which would
allow the prisoners to 60 free. 1t was not until
the day before that he became aware that the
principal witnesses for the government had de-
cded to change their testimony and thus let
the men 60 free. These changes of opinion
were outside of his knowledge, and the respon-
siblity must rest where it belongs. The ques-
ton is not of the actual guilt of the prisoners,
but whether there is probable cause for their
detention. After the remarkable testimony by
the chief government Witness he thought
doubt had perhaps been raised whether there
were any W atches in Mr.. Days stare, or any
larceny committed. He assumed that at or
about the time of the robbery was discovered,
the watches were taken by parties resembling
these prisoners The police had worked up the
case admirably. On the strength of the de-
spatch sent by the Marshal, containing the de.
scription given by Mr.. Day, these men were ar
were positively identified by both Mr.. Day and
his brother. The prisoners had not attempted
to clear themselves. They had at once assum-
ed nonchalant manner; as much as to say,
prove this, if you cam Finally they sent
for a friend, and since his arrival, very i'm
portant change has taken place in the attitude
of the chief government witnesses. But luckily
Mr.. Sawyer's testimony is unimpeachable. The
man he identifies as on the run on Middle
street is found in the company of the man
whom Mr.. Days brother recognizes, all but the
recent growth of chin-whskers.
Judge Knight thought, although these men
had not been proved guilty Of this particular
euoApS BULL was CNiOoub ArOm tu6lr WuOl6
course that they had something to conceal. The
evidence of the chief witnesses was remarka-
BILE. A man is liable to mistake in Identified
ton, land might say things out of court he would
not say in court. But the Identification in this
case had been SO immediate, and the course
pursued by the prisoners, with facts so strongly
against them, was SO suspicious, that the court
thought there was probable cause, and would
bind them over in the sum of $1,000 each to the
September criminal term of the Superior Court
Some objection was made that the bail was ex-
cessve and the Judge consoled the counsel for
the prisoners with the remark that somebody
had been trading and it was well to 60 slow
and sure until the bottom of the matter was
reached.
The men INDUCED in a good deal Of cheap
profanity when they came to realizing sense
of their situation. 1t was impossible for them
to get bail and ons of them remarked that by
lying in Jail until September they should lose
the best of the season. 1t is hard that such
men should lose one whole season, but then
next year perhaps they can make it up if they
get good field where tho county attorney and
city marshal are not SO set in their notions