The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1891-12-10
The Court S Speaks About Corrobo-
rating Evidence In the Bar
mum Trial.
Testimony Introduced to Prove an
Alibi for the Young
Man.
A Witness Says u Four ear-OId Child Can
Earn Four Dollars per
.". Week.

During the trial Of Ed Barnnm yesterday
a question arose concerning the testimony
given by Carr and johnson, the ranchmen
who claim that they entered into an ar
rangement with Barnurn to witness a man
rifle a mail sack in a coulee near the Mann
ranch. After some argument by the prose-
cution Judge Knowles said he had not made
up his mind but he thought he would in
struct the jury that unless there was some
other evidence which would connect Bar
mum personally with tho crime they could
not convict. After adjournment last night
Mr.. Mcdonald, the assistant attorney for
the government. said the view taken by
Judge know les was a surprise, yet he felt
confident of obtaining a verdict OF guilty.
The instructions have not been submitted
to the court yet. Carr and Johnson's story
as related in court by them on Tuesday
il treated by the defense as n thing
born of the imagination. The testimony of
half q dozen witnesses was introduced by
the defense to show that it WAS impossible
for Barnum to have been in the coulee at
the time Carr and Johnson say they saw
him there. Mrs. Barnum was on the stand
during the afternoon and displayed the
ouu1c ICuOllJobD vi UNIV so -
her own trial. Mr.. Weed asked her why
she did not make some inquiries about the
second robbery or take sorne interest in it
when she learned that one had been COM
mitted. She answered that by advice of
her counsel she had RETAINED from looking
into the matter.
Enoch Barnum, her husband, was sharply
pressed OH cross-examination by Mr.. Weed.
who asked him if he was not now under
arrest for mail robbery. He that
he did not know; that the Indictment for
conspiracy against him had been quashed.
Don't you know" asked the cross-exam-
liner, THAT the government officers are
holding you now?" Yes, he knew he was
being held. Haven't you consulted with
your attorney about your arrest?'
II haven't had a chance"
MIR. Barnum was brought from Great
Falls with his two sons, two weeks age and
placed in jail. since the indictment was
quashed his attorneys have been busy de-
Tending his wife and son Ed in court. which
explains Mr.. Barnum's answer.
One of tho witnesses for the defense was
asked how We knew that Ed. Barnum was
at his home on Sept. Z. well, | know it
was the 7th because the next morning was
the 9Th, The witness then explained that
he had q dispute with his wife about the
date and they settled it by reference to a
calendar.
The defense rested late in the afternoon
after introducing q lot of af1idavits from
former neighbors of the Barnum family in
Minnesota, who testify to the former good
reputation of the entire family before they
came to Montana. At the close of the
prosecution two papers signed by one of the
ranchmen were introduced in evidence.
One was made before Inspector Sackett and
recites that the siener saw a strange man
rihing a mail sack. The second paper,
claimed by the defense to have been signed
ten hours after the first, r%etracts the state
ment first made and says the stranger was
Ed. Barnum.
Mr.. Mcdonald began the opening argu-
ment to the jury or behalf of the govern
ment. He did not ask the jury to feel a
undue anxiety for the government. In
speaking of the testimony Of Carr and
johnson he commented on the fact that
the defense had made no attempt to pro-
cure testimony which would tend to prove
that they were of bad character. All of the
Barnum family except the father, and
Roger, the Youngest son, had seats near the
jury during the argument. The father and
Roger we're taken back to the county Jail.
The arguments will close to-day.