Daily Los Angeles herald., 1878-07-14
Pacific Coast News.
The Trial or sprnguc.

ASsbS SV0SA NCSSs
~ow
The Triai or sprnguc.
SAN BUENAvENTURA,J July 13.-
This afternoon Austin Browns
cross-examination was continued
at great length. He said: l had
two conversations with Sprague on
the subject of More's death. In
the first lie said that More ought to
have been killed long ago and
would have been if anyone had
been detailed to do it. made no
reply TO this and the conversation
ended. Snyder was present. The
second conversation occurred two
weeks later and three weeks before
the killing. Witness here repeated
what he said in his direct examina-
tion as to the conversation between
Sprague and Kinds. Sprague
said that More was going to
take all the water and
turn his sheep loose all over our
grass and grain and asked, what
shall we do with him? / said, |
don't know, l have nothing to do
with Mr.. More. Referring to the
previous conversation, / asked
Sprague why the squatters did not
detail him to kill More. He re-
piled that this was just what he
came to talk about. 1t is now all
fixed. Witness repeated Sprague's
statement as to the disguises, rem.
devious, etc. Sprague said lie
would do the killing and only
wanted me to stand guard. He
got no impression from what said
that l would help him in the mat
ter. told him / could not come
and asked him who the parties
were who were in the plot. Did
not see More after this until he was
dead. First told A. J. Cole of these
conversations with Sprague; told
him next day, but omitted to tell
him of the plot to kill More. Mem
toned 1t indirectly to Meek, also
in August, five months after the
murder. Next told it to w. H.
More, brother of the deceased. In
February, 1878, ]. r. Willoughby
bought my place. Don't know
that he ever saw it. Never saw
him there. Got $1,000 for it.
Have not received the money,
only notes. They were dated be-
fore testified in the examina.
ton of Sprague. Had no under
standing that the validity of the
notes depended upon the convic.
tion of Sprague. 1t Is none ofyour
business where the notes now are.
The Court ordered the witness to
answer, counsel asserting that he
expected to show that the witness
was bribed. The notes are assigned
to A. ID. Barnard for no considera-
tien. Don't know that Barnard is
active in this prosecution. 1t was
not understood that the notes were
to remain in Bsrnard's hands till
the conclusion of the trial. Were
left with him for safe keeping. Did
not know Barnard until 1 gave him
the notes. Did not know whether
Willoughby, the purchaser of my
ranch, was solvent; trusted that to
Barnard. Lived on the property
about year and offered it for sale
nearly year ago. The notes are
payable to me and not indorsed. l
signed them over to Barnard, wrote
my name on the back of them. My
land was outside the tract con-
firmed to More. When bought It'll
supposed the title to be clear. Don't
know how long 1 had the notes
in my possession, nor what kind of
paper they were written on, or
whether 1t was a printed form or
note. One of them has been paid.
l took seme of the money to Ore.
gon with me. Came back from
Oregon to see my family and at
tend this trial. The operator at
Portland told me | was wanted
here. No one advanced. me money
nor paid my passage. No one
gave me money. My passage was
paid by A. P. More, who come af-
ter me. l intend to return when 1
can. Would not have come except
for MIR. More. On redirect and
crcss-examination, witness stated
that he sold his property on the
Sespe because he did not think it
safe to live there. Cole told me
since the prisoners were arrested
that Curlee had said he would kill
me. Mr.. Crawford has also told
mo to keep a good watch out. Put
the notes in Barnard's hands for
fear of my creditors aud for safe
keeping. Cole warned me after |
had left the place, but Crawford
warned me last summer.
At the conclusion of Browns tes-
timony an attempt was made to in
troduce the deposition of N. II.
Hickerson, deceased. This was re-
sisted by the defense on five or six
grounds and the propositions were
briskly and ably discussed pro and
con by MIR. Ganahl and Mr.. Hay-
mond, both quoting the common
law back to the time of William
and Mary of England, statute law
decisions and all other sources Of
legal authority. Finally the
prosecution conceded Mr.. HAY.
mond's proposition, that Kicker
sons ante nlortem affidavit was not
admissible. He then attacked the
portion Of Hickerson's testimony
actually given before the com nit
ting magistrate. on the ground that
the defense had no opportunity to
impeach him as to the truth of his