The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-08-11

this city, and number of Others also testified
that the reputation of III. l.. Gilmer for truth
and veracity was good. The court then ad-
iourned till P. M.
At the opening of the afternoon session the
State put upon the witness stand ex- Governor
Samuel Morrill,, cf Iowa He said he was res
ideut of Des Moines, and had employed Harry
L. Gilmer off and on for Eve or six weeks.
"What did you consider his reputation as to
truth and veracitv." II considered il good"
would you believe him under oatha" Eyes,
I would"
Questions by Mr.. Foster in the cross ss-examna-
ton as to alleged dishonorable actions the
part OF Gilmer, was productive OF nothing in
aid of the theory of the defense that Gilmer's
character was such that he should not be be-
lieved under oath.
George Christ, formerly city marshal of Des
Moines also testified that he would believe Gil
under oath. The same tactics were re-
peated by the defense without result. except
that it was shown that the witness had not
known Gilmer socially
A number OK other witnesses Of apparently
equal business and social standing with those
examined by the defense to prove the bac char
acter of Gimer, testified to the good character
of this important witness of the State, who
swore that he saw Spies light the fuse of the
Haymarket bomb. Six or eight of the witnesses
examined had been connected with the police
forces of Des Moines, and testified that Gilmer
had often served a special policeman in citi-
zen's clothes Mr. Foster conducted the cross.
examination of all these witnesses, and, in
nearly every case, induced the witness to admit
that he knew nothing whatever abort Gilmer
socially, and had never personally inquired into
his reputation for truth and veracity. The wit
nesses, however. were firm in their statements
that they had never known Gilmers word ques-
toned.
A. S. Berkowsky was called to testify to the
position occupied by the pile of boxes on the
Haymarket from behind which a witness for the
defense testified the bomb was thrown. The de-
fense objected, however, on the ground that
nothing new had been brought up which allowed
the State to offer testimony in rebuttal. The
objection was sustained, and the State called Po-
lice Officer Michael Kissane, who said he was in
the second rank of the police who participated in
the Haymarket riot
Before the bomb was thrown, did you have
anything in your hand which shone like the bar
rel of revolver?n
The defense objected, but were overruled, and
the witness answered: II did not,
Ten other police officers who were in the
squad which quelled the Haymarket riot were
asked the same questions, gave the same an
swers. were not crossexamined, and Mr.. Grin.
mel announced that the case for the State was
closed Upon this the counsel on both sides
entered discussion as to the number and sue
cession Of speeches to be made. Judge Gary
said presently, the counsel not being able to
agree to the succession of speeches. he should
allow but two speeches on side. There being
eight defendants he would allow eight speeches
on a side If the counsel insisted on that number
Meantime the counsel must agree among them
selves as to the order of speeches. The court
then adjourned till tomorrow morning.