The New York herald., 1879-12-19
THE MANHATTAN BANK ROBBERY

CONTINUATION OF THE TRIAL OF WILLIAM
KELLY--LAwYER BRooKE's, INDIGNANT DE-
NIAL-THE EVIDENCE FOR TIE DEFENCE
BEGUN.
, At the opening of the Court of oyef and Torminer
yesterday. judge Daniels on the bench the trial of
William Kelly. one OF the alleged burglars Of the
Mannattun Savings Institution. was continued. and
from the AUDIENCE which filled the court and the adj
joining lobby seemed to excite increased interest
Mr. Charles W Brooke, the counsel alleged to have
been referred to in the testimony OF the watchman
Shevelin. on the previous day as having been en-
pioyed to 80 to Washington in the interest of the
burglars. appeared in court ana made brief ad-
dress, in which he Indignantly denied the statement
SO far it might be supposed to apply to him. He
asserted that he never received any money from
Kelly or any one else to go to Washington. and was
never employed for any such purpose This was
pronounced by both the Judge and the District At
torney being entirely satisfactory to them SO far
Mr.. Brooke was concerned.
MORE EVIDENCE AGAINST KELLY.
The first witness called for the day Patrick
Rail- an officer of tho Court OF General Sessions. He
testified that he knew the prisoner Kelly for num-
Der OF years; on the night OF the 26tn OF October.
1878, he drinking in the saloon of Flood at the
corner OF Thirythird street and Eighth avenue and
remained until two O'Clock the following morning: !:
at that hour Kelly complained OF being sick and left
the store.
Patrick Ryan. barkceper at the corner of avenue
9 and Seventh street. had seen Kelly and Shevelin
frequently together; Kelly gave him package with
money in It to give to Shevelin. and he did Kelly
subsequently took 5000 out OF the package telling
tell Shevoin 1t all right: he told Shevon what
Kelly said but did not ttll him that the money was
sion Kelly told him TO tell shevein that as soon
a. they disposed OF the rest OF the bonds they would
leave some more money for him.
The next witness was Policeman Gilgar, of the
Fifteenth precinct, who testified that at about
O'Clock on the morning OF the robbery lie pass
ing the Manhattan Bank on the opposite side OF
Bleecker street he heard milkman cry out i'll tho
usual manner, and at the same time noticed man.
who. he was subsequently told. Johnny Hope.
come out OF the bank without hat. or coat and say
something to the milkman which he could not un-
derstand; he did not have his suspicious excited by
these facts and passed on.
On cross-examinatipn by Mr.. Beach this witness
stated that he first saw the man when he pushed
walk; he could not sayif he came out OF the bank
proper or ONLY from behind the weather door; he
some remark which he could not understand; the
milk wagon was thon. perhaps something like thirty
feet away witness was at the time in citizens dress
and was going to church; he did not know to whom
the could have been talking unless the milk
man; he subsequently identified Johnny Hope be-
ing. in his belief the man he coming out of the
bank door; the man who came out had hat coat
nor did he make any attempt at concealment and
returned into the bank again.
Policeman William Warren, also of the Fifteenth
precinct testified that he was on duty up to seven
o'clock on the morning of the robbery; about quar-
ter to six he John Hope standing at the corner
of Crosby and Bleecker streets; this about
hundred and twenty-five feet from the entrance to
the bank; he spoke TO Hope.
John Tree testified that he a fireman in the
gne house of the Singer Manufacturing Company;
saw Kelly often ut Patrick Morris. OF Fifth
street and avenue c; Kelly in company with
Shevelin and the witness drank with them.
This closed the direct testimony for the prosecu-
tion and Mr.. Beach renewed his motion previously
made that the prosecution be compelled to elect on
which count in the indictment 1t was intended to
rely, there being charging burglary on the
dwelling Of Louis Werke. the janitor, and another
charging burglary the bank. Judge Daniels
denied the motion, bnt with leave to the defence to
renew it when the testimony shall be all in.
DEFENCE.
The defence, as outlined by MIR. Beach in q very
few words that evidence would be produced
showing the whereabouts Of Kelly on the morning
OF the burglary and shaking the crediblity OF the
testimony produced against him.
The first witness produced was Peter Karny who
said he was the brother Of Mrs. Flood, for whom
Kelly worked Flood died the 18th OF last December
and witness took charge Of the liquor store; Kelly
was night barkeeper and remained there two weeks
later.
Edward Haggerty knew Kelly and that he was in
the employ of Mr.. Flood; in May last he nego-
tating with Kelly enter his service barkeeper
he failed get the building he sought however, and
never employed Kelly.
At this point Mr. Beach said he was disappointed
by the absence OF other important witnesses aud
asked an adjourn meht The Court accordingly
adjourned to half-past ten O'Clock this morning.