St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-12-11
COLLAR WAS DRY.
Horizons Story Does Nor Exactly
Tally In a Material Point

DuI HCiilef iuc JuuBt hot lHe dtLOFHeyb were
In attendance. Horton stolidly sat with his
back towards the people. and when Judge
Kelly arrived. County Attorney Egan took
the opportunity to make application In re-
gard to another case. This disposed of, all
was in readiness to proceed with the trial.
Joe Grasim was recalled, and IN answer TO
Mr.. Mum said that the morning after the
night OF the drowning be examined the col
lar and the shirt put off by Horton at Girls
wold's room. The collar was q linen one,
turned down.
WAS the collar still stiff
YES sir. The collar of the SHIRT had also
not been wet
MI. Erwin-Did you examine the yestsl
"Yes SIR
"Nofwet all over The bottom parts were
wet.''
Dr. Quinn. coroner, spoke OF taking posses
sion OF Horizons trunk.
Mr. Erwin-Had you any authority?
II had not, sir"
Mr. Munn-Did you examine the contents
of that trunk?
Yes, sir.
Did you find any lettersf'
Yes, SIR
lie identified a letter produced, but could
not say what had become of the envelope.
He had the envelope in his possession. but
could not say what had become of it. He re-
membercd giving the letter to the stenogra-
ptier at the Inquest, but did not know as to
whether the envelope was with it or not He
had searched high and low for the envelope,
but could not find it.
Mr. Munn-Who was the letter addressed
to?
Mr.. Erwin objected. Foundations had not
been shown.
Judge Kelly sustained the motion and, as
DR.. Quinn remembered giving the letter to
the stenographer, it was decided to call him
and see if he knew anything about the en-
yelope.
Miss Van Wie's Connection.
Mrs. Jennie Hensley, of 234 East Thir-
teenth street, said i'll April last Horton and
Miss Mary Van VIE took rooms at her house.
Mr.. Munn-Detail those rooms as to their
location.
Mr.. Erwin objected. The state had dis
claimed any relation between Horton and
Miss Van Vie other than that of gentleman
and lady. What was the OF jtet of this testi-
mony? What was it for? He objected be-
cause the tendency of the evidence was to
disprove the theory laid down by the state in
It's opening as TO the character of the inter.
course between Horton and Miss Van VIE
He also objected because no evidence had
been addueed that the drowning of Mrs Hor-
ton was premeditated.
Judge Kelly overruled the objection.
witness then said that the rooms were on
the same floor, and connected by folding
doors. Miss Van Vie had reception room,
with sleeping apartment in the alcove.
Mr. Munn-Just state their relations to-
wards each other. as far as you observed
their conduct.
Judge Kellv-You must not have her con-
illusions: you must have what she saw.
Mr.. Munn-Tell what you saw
MT ErWln-Does the court rule it proper?
Judge Kelly-Yes. but not to tell her con-
illusions.
Mr.. Munn-Did you notice the doors be-
tween their rooms!
> Yes
Ibid you ever see them open:''
well they were aiar at times. OF course
was not always there
Mr.. Erwin vigorously protested against the
Introduction OF this evidence What was the
intention OF the state ny introducing it? Did
they want to show there was adulterous in
tereourse between Horton and Miss Van Vie?
Mr.. MUM combatted the objection offered.
The state was not attempting to prove adult
ereus intercourse; but what they would at
tempt to prove was that HorNn and Miss
Van VIE were lovers.
Judge Kelly supported the line taken by
the'acting county attorney, and the evidence
proceeded.
Mr.. Munn-Did you see them frequently
together in Miss Van Wie's reception room?
Yes"
What time of day?''
Usually i'll the evening after tea
doors being ajars''
Well, when they first came spoke to my
husband about locking the doors, and
Mr. Erwin objected TO this testimony, and
ME- MUM did not press. proceeding:
When did you see the doors open?''
IN the evening usually
Ibid you find them ajar any other time of
tn day?"
Il don't remember
Nothing Suspicious
Mr.. Erwin subjected the witness to severe
croSs-eXamination: Horton and Miss Van
Vie were only boarders. They remained
until June. The domestic usually made the
beds: when she was busy, witness attended
to them. The girl might leave the folding
doors afar.
WAS there anything in the relations of Hor-
ton ana Miss Van Vie which was not gentle
manly and ladylike.
Nothing but that of lady and gentle,
man."
There was nothing to awaken veIIr susni
eions:"
I believe they were acting as gentleman
and lady?''
MISS Van VIE was woman over thirty or
thirty five.''
Yes"
-. "A dignified womanF'
There was nothing to create the slightest
If there had been. sir. should never
have allowed them to stay in my house"
Miss Van Vie first had her bed in the al
cove. She did not like that, and it was
brought Into the room used for receiving
This did not suit her and single bed was OBJ
aimed and placed in the aleove.''
Did Horton and Miss Van Vie go to
church together
what church,
Central Park Methodist church"
Miss Van Vie raw the rooms first and in
the evening she returned with Horton They
made separate arrangements for the renting
OF the rooms. Both paid IS per month for
board and rooms. When re-examined, Mrs
hensley said she never heard Horton speak
OF his wife or children.
f. NJ. Hensley followed his wife onto the
stand, and was quickly disposed of. He de-
posed TO u conversation he had with Horton,
who said:
~ on may think it strange Miss Van Vie
and coming to board at your house, but we
expect TO be married soen.''
How long had he been there?"
Il could not say; few days.
hat gave rise TO the conversational
Il could not tell you, unless nv wife smoke
to Miss Van Vie about them coming TO-
getber."
Did he ever intimate he was marrieds"
No"
That Letter.
Joe Devlin. stenographer at the INQUEST,
was put forward and stated that he remem-
eered nothing about the envelope of Miss
Van Wie's letter.
street. said Horton took room at Der place
June 70. which he continued to occupy until
Aug. IL; and spoke to the coroner coming
Aug. II and taking his trunk away
Mr.. Mum wanted to once more introduce
DR.. Quinn and clear up that missing en-
velope. Dr.. Quinn was called, but was not
forthcoming. A recess was taken to await
mis- appearance. He was quickly secured
and placed upon the stand. The envelope,
he said, was addressed walter f. Horton"
Mr.. Erwin objected to the letter being put |
IN as evidence. Il was an unanswered letter |
and it has been decided that such letters
could not be put in evidence.
Mr.. Mum argued the case cited by Mr. |
Erwin was not applicable to this case
Mr.. Erwin said if the letter contained the |
most damaging confession or admission of |
crim NAL intercourse together, to the last ex-