The record-union., 1891-02-14
AMELIA BEHRING'S DEFENSE.
Mrs. GiIIig's Maid Offers Evidence Of
a Good Character.
Close of the Testimony for the Peo-
pie = Why She Was
Prosecuted.

Department Two of the Superior Court
was crowded again yesterday when the
trial of Amelia Gehring, Mrs. Amy Gillig's
maid, was resumed before Judge Davis
of Marysvile, who is acting for Judge
Van Fleet.
The young defendant occupied seat by
her counsel, Clinton and Lincoln White,
and was accompanied by her friend, Mr..
Lang, a San Francisco brewer.
The forenoon and a portion of the after
noon was consumed by the prosecution,
i'll presenting their testimony-eachw wit
ness being subjected to a long and search
ing csoss-examination by the defendants s
attorneys. Harry NJ. Gillig corroborated
his wife's testimony about finding
THE STOLEN DIAMONDS
And other valuables in Amelia's room.
He said that, after the recovery of the
missing articles, the girl had been dis
missed, but he and his wife concluded
that she ought to be prosecuted in order
to protect others from her acts, and that
as the prosecutors We're anxious to go
East, they had hired special counsel to
take the place of District Attorney RYAN,
who was busy in the other department
of the Superior Court.
Mary Cook, an employe at the CroclSer
mansion, who occupied the same room
with the defendant, testified that she had
seen amelia wearing some jewelry that
belonged to Mrs. Gillig. Regarding a
certain dress that Mrs. Gillig said had
been stolen. Amelia had told the witness
that Mrs. Gillig'S mother, Mrs. Crocker,
had given it to her.
Mrs. }. Bender, of Nevada-a guest at
the Crocker residencc-and Miss Quinn.
~
ing the finding of the stolen articles in
the maids room.
Mrs. Gsillig was then recalled and ques-
toned regarding some minor matters,
after which tho prosecution rested.
THE DEFENSE.
The defendant and her attorneys had a
consultation, after which it was an
nounced that no opening statement would
be made.
1t was soon made apparent that the
principal defense to be offered was that
Amelia had borne good character pre-
vious to her arrest, and did not really
mean to be dishonest.
The first witness called was William
Lang, OF San Francisco. He testified
that he was acquainted with the defend
ant, and WAS raised Will, her in the town
of Ganburg, Germany. Prior 10 the
time he left Germany for this country he
had never heard anything wrong about
the girl. On the contrary, she had the
reputation of being honest and trust
worthy.
on cross-examination, Mr.. Lang adj
mitted that he had not seen Amelia for
five years, and knew nothing of her rep
utation or the life she led after leaving
Gamburg.
The testimony of Michael Lang, Adam
Bach, W. Wegner and others was prac-
ticaliy the same as that given by the first
witness. They had all known her IL
Ganburg, but none of them knew any
thing about her career during the last
two or three years. They ali stated, how
ever, that, SO far as their knowledge went,
the girl had never done anything wrong
prior to her arrest on the present charge.
AMELIA on THE STAND.
The defendant was placed on the wit
ness-stand shortly before 6 O'Clock, hut
was only partially examined when the
court adjourned until to-day. She testi-
fed that she did not steal anything be-
longing to Mrs. Gillig. Some OF the ar
ticles had been given to her, while others
she had been told 10 put away by her
mistress, and in delaying, to obey orders
Immediately did not mean to keep the
articles.
The trial will be resumed to-day, when
the defendant will finish her story, and
the case will be given to the jury.