Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-06-01
did not inform his attorney of these facts.

/ Ereemau'S sister, MIS-. Alice u. Aston
| in her deposition. says that she has reat
the affidavit of her mother, and knows th,
facts therein stated to be true, and she cor
roborates her mother in those facts. AL
though her brother, when in his norma
condition, is very affectionate toward her
I he at one time attacked her most savagely
and on another occasion assaulted her with
knife-on both occasions, apparently
| without any cause, and both times he was
taken shortly afterward with fits. When
| under the influence of liquor, too, his
whole nature seems changed; he acts anS
| looks like mailman, attacks and abuses
his best friends, and seems to have no con.
troll of himself. DR.. Niles, formerly oil
Roseville, now deceased, after treating the
defendant for fits. superinduced by drink,
| informed the affiant that liquor had q
very dangerous effect on Freeman, and, in
his opinion, he would, probably finally
have to be sent to the Stockton Insane
Asylum. Mrs. Aston says further that on
the afternoon of the day of Mark Feeney's
under the influence of liquor to such an
extent that she feared him, and hid herself
from him.
In conclusion Mrs. Aston makes the
announcement that since the trial and
conviction of her brother, she met Archie
Wilke, who was the principal witness for
the prosecution, and the following CONVEX
sation passed between them, Wilke begin
ming it:
Il came pretty near taking my few duds
and skipping the country last night,
Alice"
"What for, ARCHER"
About this trouble; Charley is innocent.
We found the cook dead in the barrel
when we got home. Charlie wouldn't
have whipped me only he was crazy
drunk"
HE ATTEMPTED SUICIDE.
DR.. William Bolton of Placer county set
forth in an affidavit that he attended Free
man three or four years ago for an over
dose of strychnine, which had been taken
with suicidal intent while under the influ-
ence of liquor. Intoxicating liquors"
says the doctor, when INDUCED in by
him seem to render him crazy, and on
such occasions, in my opinion, he cannot
control himself"
Ida Butler, William Spanier, Mrs. Lille
Freeman, Harry Curry, William LaDuc
and Fred. Coleman, all of Sacramento
county, in joint affidavit state that they
have all known Freeman since his child
hood, and know that when sober he is
peaceable and quiet, but when in liquor is
like mailman and unable to control him
self.
A Placer county delegation consisting of
r. c. Campbell, j. d. Pratt, F. F. Stephen
son, P. d. Pratt, and Harry Curry swear
to similar state of facts. Each of them
have seen him when in liquor, and say
that when in that condition he is not him
self, is apt to abuse and attack his best
friends, ETC.
Mrs. Eva Fricke's affidavit is to the effect
that she has known Freeman for some two
years, and has frequently seen him under
the influence of liquor, at which times he
was like crazy man. She also saw him
during portion of the day of Mark
Feeney's death, and be appeared to be
under the influence of whisky at that time.
She saw him again on the morning after
Feeney's death, and he did not appear to
have any recollection of what had occurred
the day before.
MUST HAVE BEEN DRUNK.
The deposition of A. Keithley contained
the statement that on the day of Feeney's
death Archie Wilke purchased q flask of
whisky in his presence, and went away
with Freeman. Subsequently, Wilke tes-
titled at the inquest that he (Wilke) only
took one drink out of the flask, while
Freeman nearly emptied it. knowing
Freeman's capacity for liquor, the affiant is
confident that if Freeman did drink that
amount of whisky he would have become
crazy drunk and dangerous. The affiant
saw Freeman on the night of Feeney's
death, and, seeing that be had been drink
ing, tried to induce him to go home, and
thus avoid getting into trouble.
j. A. Aiston's affidavit related recent
remark made by Archie Wilke at Ante
lope in the hearing of the afiant. Wilke
said that Charlie Freeman was crazy
drunk the night that Mark Feeney died.
He wouldn't have hit me that night if he
hadn't been crazy drunk. l wouldn't
want to see him get more than year OF
eighteen months, and that for striking
me-"
The affidavits of W. J. Blair, John
Aston, Mary Aston and Fred Fricke were
all to the effect that Freeman was docile
when sober, but maniac when in his
cups.
The last affidavit read was subscribed
and sworn to by attorney Charles N. Post,
who defended Freeman during the trial.
Mr.. Post says that no one ever informed
him that liquor had the effect of making
Freeman irresponsible and insane, or that
he was subject to fits, until after the trial
and conviction. No one ever informed
him, either, that insanity was hereditary
in Freeman's family until after the trial.
Judge Van Fleet took the matter under
advisement, and will render his decision
next Friday.