The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-02-21

whom my uncle had spoken ssous ths
matter
The eross-exs;nsnssiea vas then szs.
pended By the noon recess
IKE LAND FrLrsss
When court was convened nezl1 TIE
fraudulent land GSings were brought m
and the witness told substantially the
same sf1rJ as 70 the cffecz examination
The following effort was then made 20
break down her statement
did yoa Eot fske your marriage certla
fAse to Mr., Ntekersbasn. telling him sgs,
was . widow In December. fss7, before
making your land fling"
.sDid ron not Afterwards tell M. Brown
/ thx, you had ssssd Mr.. wiekersham ron was
. widow thai be bad laughed ii the fdea
/ bar Joa bad convinced him by shoxfrv
tf.s oerfifeateYss
~ did not
Did you nos tel the sssae story % DR..
Miller
II I'D rot.
when did you show Nr. wtekexh.r
the marriage certf1eafesss
ON he evening before he sent me East
had tod him atzons srcelsl NJ Il NJ The
/ faIne Of fling On fhe land.
DIG you not tell him ron gos IL from
II did not
ibid you notice Ens po=tsnask on The en-
veiope IN which the certificate rxmsF
Ne lid not. threw the exyelo<e
Away ~ was leaving the postosfiee, NOT
knowing what the paper was
DIG the Afrn OF wicks-shsm & Murray
attend 70 yoar land business for yourss
Mr.. Wickerham did the busi ness; do
DOT know Mr.. Murray
foa took a. oath that you Was widow
AT the land Officer
when made application for the land
= - i
did not know what was In the paper"
Had yon no tnsimafion that you would
ne required TO swear taat y3u was q
II knew would have to take some kind
o. ~ oath and Mf. Wiekers ban told me to
say was a widow"
did yes aos know 4 was wrong TO take
Yes. knew II was wrong; bus tsfd II
because Mr.. Wickersham had told me
mnsf.
WAS there an understanding that ron
he advanced 10 yop7"
yes lie said / could pay hfn back
when sold the laiad. or could give him
.Dld you not say 10 DR.. Misner in his
Office. In Tacoma il 1857 that yon had
once been married TO man named Water.
man.
s.So. sir. did make some sseh state
ment when went TO HIM the following
spring"
DID ron tell him who would pap for his
services.
ssSos at that time
THE TACOMA PHYSICIANS
"Dsa DR.. Miller attend you when Won
were Ill at Mr. Talbotss in March, 1851 :
fes, | was sick then, and DR.. Miller
treated rae for what he called heart
ssTs Il t..x. ~. -. .x..1,s - ar.
fnatinn, that Drs. Miller 4 Brown admins
tered cocaine 20 you at the time they
performed this alleged operatsonT''
1T il.
-How do you know II was cocaineg'
They said II was"
did you see them have any lnstru-
fnentsra
mo; but heard them rattle
Are you willing 10 swear IN instrument
= believe one was; bat will not swear
who Introduced this man Bulger to
| your
sDr. Brown brought him 70 me after /
had been taken to seartle aud said he
would take care 81 me-"
did you not have lady nurse after
..Yes: Buiger afterwards got Mrs. Blake
TO walt on me for . week"
SUGGESTIVE QUESTIONS.
when at Puyalinp In the summer OF iss7
| where did you stop"
AT the Central hote,. sept by Mr.. Hoi-
lenbeck. was there snree days aud oeea.
pied foorn of from the patior
DID you not have young men in your
room after the other guests had retired. and
did not Mr. Hoilenbcck tell son that you
must keep the young men out and make
less noise"
No, sir"
who paid your bill there
Il paid IL myself"
$40 You know stephen Bakerss
sNo. SIR
The prosecuting attorney demanded that
stephen Baker should come forward IL he
vas in the room. He stepped 10 the front
and stood few feet from the witness, who
said:
- do not know him.
s.nid you not meet him In a house on ID
street. south Of Thirteenth, Tacoma, one
uights
do you know Mari nislllenga
mo. SIR
Dillon was brought forward on the de.
maud OF the prosecuting witness, and the
witness again said she did not know him.
DO you know Nike Berry,"
4 sir. Berry was not in the court room.
Did yen not see Baker and Dillon az a
certain house In Tacoma early Ia iss5g'
u have never been ia that house
DO you knov young man by the
Il think should know him ii were to
/ see him.
I'd. Hall. beardless youth, came for
ward. aud the witness said
THAT Is Ed Hail.
Did you ever meet hinl when In com
pany With stephen Bakgrg''
No. sir. ] never was IN company with
stephen Baker,
ibid you ever meet him at the certain
house spoken oiFe'
Never
"po yen know Harry Muliang'
"So, sir
Auliau was not In court
in whose presence did YOU make an
affidavit concerning the facts In this cases''
mt, WiioeS. Mr.. hadebaugh AID Mr..
This closed the cross examination.
EyInENcE IN RERurrAL
ON the rebuttal the witness stated that
with the story that Mr.. wtckersham had
| put into her mouth about her marriage
Prosecuting Attorney Ronald then asked
her concerning her relations with Ed Hall
How did you know Ed Haiig
II saw him once or twice At the Central
scheoihouse In Tacoma. lie had been
away and on hts return he was pointed
out hy a friend"
Were yon ON terms Of improper intimacy
with him.
FL was not.
jus, then something happened to cause
the large audience 20 burst ont into loud
laugh. Judge hgrke, who hasi been listen
inE attsuiiyely TO The evidence. spraGg to
his feet aud win gesture that command
ed immediate silence and order, said,
II viii allow no such conduct IN this
courtroom. n | had felt sure | had &
right TO clear this courtroom / would have
done 80 long ago. have no patience with
such pTursent curiosity as has been ex-
hibited during this trial by the crowd that
stands opea- nouthed 10 hear the details of
a woman's shsme. DO not know that l
have the right 10 clear this roota Of sll bat
witnesses. bat do know tina, have power
to preserve order. Mr., BailiEf. II you see
anyone making a disturbance again bring
hlla forward and Will make an example
81 him.s
one OF the hRillfs stripped over 20 nan
sitting 80 the body OF the house and taking
him by the afm led him before his honor
aud ohargcd him with laughing and max
inv other disturbances.
The man protested he was a wlss-sSs and
had been oF9egiy.
"ieS. he's witness for the defense"
safd the prosecuting attorney.
"Ne. ar isa't. said Mr.. JEdsoa, .'he
Your witness
while the attorneys were wrangling
over this question Judge Burke repft-
manded the fellow, who proved 90 he
felieem man Ward, OF Tacoma. After this
there Was ne disturbance In court.
The wltn<ss then went GA to testify that
her Illness Vt Mrs freefnans was pro-
dneed by natural csIses and nux as the
result ct any uuchssto aci prior Ia the ene
tor which the defendant was being tried,
lAlS closed the examination OF Miss
HranfEla- tgEp had hsaafa .kfa shfs sfnf4t ffsr