Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-12-13
Tony HEuKE'S DEATH.
DEFENDANT J. J. GLACKEN GIVES HIS
VERSION OF THE AFFAIR.
He Contends that He Shot Menke in
SeH-Defense-An AIlusion to Al
legged Former Threats.

Justice Devine yesterday declined to con-
tinue the examination of J. ]. Glacken and
Charles Fisher, charged with the murder of
Antoine Menke, Notwithstanding the fact
that Grove L. Johnson, the leading attorney
for the defense, was engaged in the con-
tempt case on trial in the Superior Court.
The defense was therefore conducted by
Hiram W. johnson, and Assistant District
Attorney A. j. Bruner conducted the pros
ecution.
The first witness called by the defense
was ]. NJ. Sullivan, who testified that the
reputation of All Mong "a witness who had
given evidence for the prosecution) was
bad, ard policeman Higgins testified to the
same effect
John ]. Glacken, one of the defendants,
was then placed upon the stand. Before
he testified Mr.. Bruner stated that he
wished TO inform the Court at that time
that the prosecution had ascertained, and
would prove, that one of the exploded car.
tridges in Menke's pistol (there are two
discharged) was discharged early in the
day. He made the statement at that time
in order that the defense might be pre-
pared to meet it.
Witness Glacken then testified as 10 the
difficulty that occurred between himself
and the Menkes at the railroad on the
morning of the day on which the shooting
took place. He said he and his men were
engaged in loading hops on a car, when
the father OF deceased appeared. Witness
said he accosted Mr.. Menke pleasantly and
asked him if il was to be peace or war
Menke said it was to be peace, but witness
said he judged from note he had received
from Menke that the latter was not salts
he'd IN regard to the situation of their bus
mess affairs. After some conversation re-
garding settlement concerning the hops
that were in controversy, Menke called
witness vile name and declared he would
''get rid of him" At the same time he
picked up rock, and then young Menke
(the deceased) said to witness that he had
better tackle him. Witness told the latter
that 1t was none of his business, and not to
interfere. The Menkes, he said, then ad-
Vanced upon him and he retreated.
In regard to the affair later in the day,
when the shooting occurred, witness said
he and Fisher met Tony Menke in the
road near their place, and he got out of his
cart and went over to Menke's and said to
the latter that it was too bad the old man
IOt Scitlc, after thc pTUpOSltlOu u6
had made to him; that George Menke was
satisfied, and that it was he (Tony) who
stood in the way of settlement.
Tony Menke responded that witness was
liar, jumped out of the cart, drew his
pistol and shot at witness. The latter
threw up his arm, and the bullet struck
his wrist. (The coat, with powder-marks
on the sleeve, was then shown in Court
Menke then shot again, and the ball struck
Fisher, who had rushed between them. As
soon as Fisher got out of the way he
,(Glacken) began shooting. He considered
that his life was in danger. He said his
relations with Tony Menke had been agree
able, and that he bore no malice against
him.
Witness was here questioned by Mr..
johnson as to what the deceased's fathel
did when he came upon the scene, after
the shooting, but Mr.. Burners objection
thereto was sustained.
Witness denied ever sending the offensive
message to the elder Menke, by his OWL
son, Willie, as testified to by the latter.
On the cross-examination, Mr.. Brunel
asked the witness if he did not, seven year:
ago, say to one John Schwertah that hs
would as soon kill Tony Menke as 6
chicken, and Mr.. Johnson strenuousiy OBJ
jected to witness responding to the ques
ton. Grove L. Johnson also came in ant
argued that the matter was too remote to b
admissible.
Mr.. Bruner offered to cite decision G
the Supreme Court in support of his posi-
ton that the testimony was admissible, bu
the Court held that it was not necessary
and overruled the objection.
Glacken said he did not remember hay
ing said anything of the kind, and NJ
Bruner then asked him if he had not mad
that remark to his wife.
To this question the objection was mad
that if the witness did SO il was priv
legged statement, and the objection was su
tanned.
Mr.. Bruner was here sent for by Superb
Judge Armstrong, who requested that II
case be continued, in order that Mr.. Johl
son might attend on the Superior Coui
The request was conveyed to Justice ID
vine, and on Mr.. Burners consentipg to
continuance, the further hearing of Il
case was postponed until 10 o'clock tt
morning