Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-04-29
NEARING TIE CLOSE.
THE FREEMAN CASE WILL GO TO THE
JURY TO DAY.
Rebuttal and Redirect Testimony-Th
Prosecution Opens the
Argument.

The trial of Charles Freeman for The
murder of Mark Feeney will be concluded
to-day and the case given to the jury.
When the trial was resumed yesterday
forenoon Freeman's attorney, C. N. Post
called Elmer Bryte of Yolo county to the
witness stand. Mr.. Bryte stated tina,
Feeney once worked with him on the Bryte
ranch and on one occasion fell into q
spasm and became insensible.
This evidence was in support of the the.
ory that Feeney was not murdered, but fell
into the water barrel.
The defense then rested, and the prose
cution called a number of witnesses for re-
direct examination.
Archie Wilkes, the principal witness for
the prosecution, took the stand again and
testified that he had never shot at any one
nor attempted to do so in Sacramento. as
intimated in Freeman's evidence on Satur-
day. The overcoat claimed by Freeman to
have been torn in the fight at the bridge,
was, Wilkes swore, torn several days be-
fore the day of the alleged encounter.
Witness said that he himself had tied the
sleeve after Freeman had put it on one
rainy day.
Robert Terrill testified that he saw
Wilkes on the night of Feeney's death
after the death-but there was no mud on
his clothing, thus making it improbable
that Freeman and Wilkes had fight on
the bridge, as Freeman testified. Terrill
also said that the coat had been torn some
time previous to the day of the alleged
fight.
Constable Lamphrey reiterated his
former testimony regarding the blood stains
on the bed in the cabin, and then large
number of witnesses were called who testl-
fed that Wilkes character was good. Sew.
eral witnesses also testified that the bridge
on which Freeman swears he knock ed
Wilkes down was covered with slush and
mud at the time, and Wilkes clothing
must certainly have been covered with
mud had he been knocked down and
beaten.
S. De Kay swore that when Wilkes came
to his house to inform him of Feeney's
death there was no mud visible on his
clothing
At the afternoon session the defense
made another attempt to prove by several
Witnesses including relatives of the defend.
ant, that Freeman's coat had not been torn
previous to the day of Feeney's death, but
il was not very successful.
This closed the testimony in the case
and the arguments were announced in
order.
Assistant District Attorney Bruner then
addressed the jury. He made a lengthy
and eloquent argument, and his summing
up OF the testimony tending to show the
guilt of Freeman, made the defendant
vince perceptibly. Mr.. Bruner read from
the Penal Code the definition of murder.
and then declared that under the law Free.
man was either as innocent as newborn
babe, or was guilty of murder in the first
degree and must suffer the death penalty.
There was no second degree or middle
ground to be taken if he were found guilty
at all. He characterized Freeman's crime
as one of the most foul and atrocious that
ever disgraced the annals of history. He
went over Freeman's testimony infinitely
and pointed out many flaws therein. It
was ridiculous story, he said, and was not
to be compared with the straightforward
and honest story told by Wilkes. The at
torney drew vivid picture of the death of
the poor, weak consumptive Feeney at the
hands of the giant Freeman, and altogether
made powerful argument against the
theory of the defense.
Attorney Post announced that he was
unprepared to go ahead with the argument
for the defense, and accordingly asked for
continuance until to-day, promising to be
ready then.
The prosecution made no objection, so
the continuance was granted.