, 1889-10-10
In HIS OWN BEHALF.
Officer William Gillespie Takes
the Stand and Tells His Side
OF the Story.
He Disclaims Having Taken Any
Goods Without pernission--A
Five-Dollar Transaction.
Most of the Time Consumed in
Objections and Arguments
OF Points of Law.


ing relief supplies was resumed before
Justice Dunning at 10 A. NJ. Saturday.
Tho defense opened their case by calling
Mr.. Gillespie TO the stand to testify in
his own behalf
MIR. GiLLEsPGE's TESTIMONY.
w. ID. Gillespie, the defendant, was
sworn and testified; | do not now re-
member the day on which tho relief tent
was erected. received goods from the
tent ON five or six occasions, consisting
of cabbage, fruit, groceries, etc first
got box of damaged green peaches.
The peaches were spelling and Mr..
inglis asked me to take them away.
This was about 10 or II O'Clock in the
forenoon, and several persons were pres
cnt. At the time of the fire | was in
poor circumstances and the bus
iucss place where traded was dc
stroycd. There were no stores in
the ncighborhood where | lived. The
second time | received three or four
more boxes. They were given to me by
lnplis. The next time received some
ham, sugar uud'N case Of goods. | got
them ON verbal orders lrom lnglig. He
delivered me the goods himself at .
O'Clock. think thcy were OF the value
of IS or $40. We hud no guards at the
ton; at the time, The next goods | re-
cciyed were ON n verbal order from
lnglis and consisted of pickles and gro
cory supplies. | spoke 10 Mr.. Hayward
about some goods, Hud hc tuld me TO get
them. ON AN order from Chief Witler.
| spoon got some GAINED goods. lnglis
. . n l.. I 4 q
| Tho goods that were mt Duchcr's were
partly intended for family next to mo ;
| they consisted of two or tAroe parts ol
/ eases of canned goods, hams and coffee /;
| they were intended for Mrs. Gilbert and
| she received them; | took some from
my house also To Mrs. Gilbert; She was
worthy and needy. | was acting in the
| capacity of police officer, had charge
| Of the eating tent. The question us tO
men and trcmcn from receiving goods
| from the tent for their own use without
/ written orders was objected to by the
/ prosecution. OycTrulcd.
Witness answered: The custom was
| that the married men on the police force
could obtain goods there without an
order. Martin and MCkcrnan received
/ some. titcmcn received goods on che
order of Chief WithcrspOun. luglis was
| in charge in liayward's absence.
never took any goods from there without
/ permission. The conversation | had
| with Councilman liottis was to this
effect. | met him ON the street and be
said that some one had sent load of
. provisions to his house, and that the
lie understood that Waters had sent it
up aud said that, by Cd, If he could
| find ont who sent IL, he would shove
them" | told him that he had better
| put the goods away that he had in his
/ front yurd or else someone would take
them. heard Hlr, Bottis' testimony
yesterday, and did not tell him that
Kcn2ie's team to haul the lund from
/ Ducbcr's house TO mine. Mckenzie
came around after supper. Ii
was not dark when lie came
nor when wcrcachCd Duebcr'-. Witness
was asked If II was ms intention to do
this clGudostincly becausc.it was getting
late. Prosecution objected to the qucs-
tion, but were oNorrulCd. Witness:
This was not my intention. was OH
duty rs q fireman and policeman con-
tinuully for the first four or five days
and the remainder Of the time ! was ON
duty fifteen or sixteen hours "a day.
There were about fifteen or sixteen sacks
OF cabbage in the tent. By lnglis' diroC-
ton we carried them outside, and then
and distribute, which did. | never did
anything secretly, nor had | any iutcn-
ton to steal those goods. About ten
cases of green lrNit were hauled to my
house. lnglis was going to destroy tic
fruit because it was spelling, aud | was
told could have 1t If ! would take the
trouble to sort IL over.
,ros.-cxanlincd: Mrs. Gilbert lives
near me. Snc has u family Of four chill
drcn. / did not lose anything by the
fire, except that | ruined my clothes
while wurkIug as fireman. | was very
busy and did not have time to purchase
any goods. got a sncl, and II part of u
sacl, of sugar, did not get potatoes
Got five or six hams and fOnr or five
cases uf canned goods, consisting of to
mutocs, peas, corn, beans and COrnCO
beef and | think some assorted fruit.
received a small kog Of pickles, butncyci
any vinegar The half barrel received
was purlly of butter. don't know how
much butter there WIS. IL iS at my
house now. Ingis gave ii to me. II
has never bccm opened. ] got can o
maple syrup. Defense objected to the
witness being questioned concerning
goods not mentioned in the complaint
| Oyerrulcd.l Witness l got some coilct
in IA -four sack. / also go
some rice, about II sack, which
was brought to my house. | got about
/ u 1--WE. pound box OF tea rom lnglis
When / got home there was forty pounds
of tea on the back steps. II Is there yet
The sugar got was granulated. / got {
whole cheese of ordinary size; dom
know how much IL would weigh. Al
these things were given me by lnglis.
asked him for them each time. ! CAV,
Inglis $5 in payment for goods ut on,
time. went to him and said, "Bob,
understand YOU are selling goods here
and If YOU are want to buy some" Ilt
suid could buy some and | gave him
the 50.
Witness was asked If he ever sent on
goods that did not go to his own house
Defense objected to the question Oh tn,
ground that 1t was irrelevant. Prose
cutting Attorney Jones argued that 1t WA
that Gillespie had obtained over S10t
worth of goods for 20. He must have
known that Inglis was putting thi'
money into his own pocket, anu knew
as well rs anybody that lnglis had M
right to sell these goods. The prosecu
ton wanted to get nt the bottom, facts o
this case. If Gillespie was innocent tn,
best way for him to clear himself WAS I,
explain the whole transaction. TIN
truth would not lnjure an innocent man
BY the time counsel were through argu
ing the poin, II was noon, and the iudg
announced that he would render his dc
csion after dinner. Court adjourned Il
. +. NJ.
, AFTERNOON SESSION.
Upon the roassembling of court i'm tn
afternoon, Judge Dunning decided tn
point raised by the defense that witnes
should only be questioned concernln
the goods named in the complaint. Th
| IL nj