Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1889-11-08

u hlDA4, NOY EMbER
A. I've known him when I've seen him fol
| two or three years but was never personally
| acquainted with him.
rest?
A. I think it was the 25th or 10Th of May.
Q, Was he kept in charge of officers some
the warrant was actually served upon him?
A. No, sir, he was locked up; / examined
him once or twice before he was taken in
| charge.
q. AS the head of the police department OF
| Chicago?
A. Yes, SIR
O. Was the examination reduced to writingi
A. The last interview was.
Q. Do you remember that last interview
pretty distinctly?
a, oh, remember some portions of it.
@. State that to the Jury please.
Mr.. Longenecker-I object
The CourtIIhat is not cross-examination,
and even If they did not object to it l would
not allow you to proceed in that way.
ARULING OF THE COURT.
Q. When was this conversation that you say
you conducted as head of the police depart
ment?
The Court-His examination in chief was
simply confined to his having seen Burke in
Jail at Winnipeg, and the Identification Of the
trunk and lock; further than that won't per-
Mr. Wiug-I would like to ask a question or
two to get the ruling of your Honor
The Courr-My ruling is general 1 will con-
fine you to the topics for which he was ex-
amined in chief.
Q. will ask you if my client. Dan Coughlin,
was not brought before you as the head of the
Police Department of this city, and interviewed
by you in reference to this case?
Mr.. MilleI-Your Honor has passed upon that
question think.
Mr.. Longenecker-That is objected to.
NloIN NANrRf he. OIS
you are allowed an exception If you want it.
@. wish to ask ono further question.
Didn't Dan Coughln then and there give to
you, Chief OF Police of this city
The Court (interrupting)-I cannot even per-
NIT the question.
A DIGUsTED ATTORNEY.
Mr. Wing-It is idle. then, to ask further
questions.
The Court-There has not been a word upon
the examination in chief about Dan Coughlin.
The next witness was Acting Captain
Herman Schuettle of the police. His test1-
monY trenched on no new ground, being
confined to narration of his visits to the
Carlson cottage, a description of its appear
ance, Identification of the trunk, key, etc.,
until section of the flooring of the Carl
son cottage was exhibited, when the exam
ination proceeded as follows:
@, Did you ever see this before? (handinp the
witness the board containing the prints in
paiEtl.
@. Where did you see it frst2
A. First at the bedroom of the Carlson cot
tage.
8. Where did you next see it2
A. When it was given to me by Officer Calve-
@. State now whether those footprints were
on that floor at the time you saw it in the Carl
son cottage?
@. How is that in color as compared with the
paint in the front room?
A. The footprints, to the best of my knowl-
edge, are the same as the painting in the parlor
of the Carlson cottage.
THE WHOLE FLOORING.
@. Did you take out any of the flooring in
the hall?
A. did not, sir.
@, Have you in your possession any Of it?
A. Yes, sir; have the whole flooring of the
Q. Have you now in your possession at the
station any lumber7
A. have sir.
q. With any footprints on itH
A Yes, sir.
@. Where did you get that?
A. From Captain Wing.
Q. Did you see that before you got it from
Captain Wing anywhere9
A. did.
O. Where?
A. At the Carlson cottage.
@. Where have you that now?
A. At East Chicago avenue station. locked up
in my private room.
@. Did you see any shutters there. Outside
window shutters?
A. did.
@ Did you take any shutter of from theref
A. 1 did.
O. What was on the shutters, if anything?
A. There were finger marks Of paint.
@. What cOlor7
A. A kind of darkish yellow-the same color
as the footprints-identical to the best of my
knowledge.
Q. Did you see that shutter while on the cot
tage?
A Yes sir.
9. Did you see these same marks on it therei
A. 1 did.
The witness was being cross-examined
when the court adjourned till tomorrow.