Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-05-19


wherein tho license of the keeper Of the
saloon in which the fracas occurred was
involved. The evidence was not allowed.
George Howser Of No, 46l North Third
street, Philadelphia, said he was present
the night of the murder. He did not sec
the prisoner strike the Italian with beer
glass.
In reply to the question OF the attorney
general, witness could not recollect
whether the disturbance took place on the
night of November 18th, 1890 or 1891 He
saw one OF the Italians knocked down
When the Italian was knocked down,
James Carr was standing with Builen
whom he knew by his dress. Carr was
mixed up in the crowd. lie saw pool
bali thrown, which knocked his hat off.
II was Carr who threw the pool-ball at the
big Italian. lie also saw Carr strike the
Italian with a beer glass more than once.
Court here took recess until go
o'clock Thursday afternoon
The grand Jury made these present
ments state vs.. Frank Fay and Frank
Barry, gambling; State VS., James Conway,
larceny; state vs.. Charles Smith, black
mail; the State vs.. Manuel Thomas, larceny
The case of the State IS. Lawrence alias
schooner Long, charged with the muir
der of Antonio l5asso, IN Italian. was re-
stunned nj Thursday afternoons session of
court The first witness called was Samuel
Adams, clerk of the municipal court. The
object in calling the witness was to prove
by the municipal court record that
Schooner" Long, the prisoner al the bar
had on former occasion been charged by
William Sparks, one of the leading wit
ncsses for the state with assault and bat
terry at the Atlantic Gardens in this city
Counsel proposed to show malice on the
part of Sparks in testifying against the
prisoner.
The next witness was Or JohnP Wales.
Witness stated that he had paid visit to
Basso prior to his death and thought that
II he had been properly cared for he would
have recovered. The condition of the de-
ceased could have been produced by ex-
posture to the sun, alcoholic drink and ty
phGid fever. The witness was cross-ex-
amined.
Andrew Sullivan, on employee of the Edi-
son Electric Light Company, was sworn MIR.
Nandegrift's examination brought out the
fact that the witness was in the saloon the
nighO of the murder and had not been
summoned by the State. Witness and
Sparks went into the saloon with llawser
10 play a game of pool. He was engaged
in playing pool when he saw the little
Italian knocked down. He also saw Bullen
strike the big Italian, liasso, with beer
glass. man, who he afterwards learned
was Carr, then struck I3asso in the face
up with chair, when witness caught hold
OF the chair and prevented him striking
Basso again. Carr then said what have
YOU to do with it Are you with these
Italians n answered mo- aud left the
saloon. Witness had no interest in the
case. he said
The witness was cross examined by the
state. In reply to the attorney generals
question witness said he was playing pool
when the small Italian was knocked
down. Carr was standing close by the
spot where the small Italian was lying on
the floor. Witness saw Bullen standing
close by thu big ltalian,n The bartender
was behind the bar Witness saw pool
Dali thrown but nothing else.
Witness was summoned in this case by
state Detective McNey while he was work
ing IN Montgomery county. Pa. He denied
that he had tolti State Detective McVev he
had seen u man with light moustache
PICK up chair. Witness thought he could
recollect a man under these circumstances
even Is months afterward. When witness
saw Carr approach him he thought that he
was going TO get beat up too. When he left
the bar-room Basso and the other Italians
hadgone. Witness thought that but two men
took any part in the fight. He could not
tell where the chair was taken from, The
bartender pulled the two men off the
Italian, and then the latter ran around the
pool table and out the alley door.
DR.. John 7. Y. lIocksom was called
i He visited Antonio Bnsso tho Sunday
/ night after the fight and found him suffer-
ing from the confused wounds in his head.
lie had been drinking Witness prescribed
lar 5asso lie thought he had been drink
inS TO excess.
III reply to the question Of the attorney
| general witness said he was i'll the room
| from five to eight minutes.
Joseph /. Long, 4 brother of the pris-
oier, was called. He saw his brother
| previous p the fight. He had no nous.
tache. Ills face WAS cloan-shaven. Wit
ness was not rroSs-exanined. Mr.. Vande.
| gfitt here closed for the defence
| Ia rebuttal the State called John Crogan
| 70 TESTIFY that Schooner Long was in
The saloon the night Of the murder Mr.
| Nandegrit entered vigorous protest to
the calling Of witnesses after the State had
Closed rs cast, especially iii Il murder ease
Mt, Nicholson, in reply, stated that the
] reason for the action was that witness
| Gould not he found during the morning
| aud ne desired to rebut the testimony Of
| thcawitlesscs who had declared that Long
| was not in the saloon the night of the
| fight Alr. Nicholson cited a number of
cases q show the authority for introducing
this testimony.
| Mr.. Nandesrtt said the fact that the
state adfailed to produce this witness WAS
no lault Of the defence The court, after
denee
Witness sal, that on the night Of the
| fight etrrand long came in thc William
| Penn llote and be gave them two 'shortn
beers they said riiey lad been down to
McMahni1s aud cleaned tile place M.
| Carr SAID; Fins man CL0ngl hits with
his PA J hit with anything | can get
hold o. Z
state Detective bernard /. Mcyey was
called t0eoutradict the testimony Of Alex
ander salllvan the witness called by the
defence, The State closed its case at 4 70
| O'Clock.
Deputy attorney General Branch ii.
| Giles opened for the State, when court ac-
| jonrned q 10 O'clock Friday morning.
Tie argument on the part Of the Staten
the Long murder trial was opened in the
court Of oyer and lcrminer BY DEPUTY
| Announcement Branch II. Giles Friday
| morning. The attendance was not as large
us On the previous days.
In opening his argument Mr.. Giles stated
| that he state would not attempt to argue
that the prisoner was guilty Of murder in
the lirsl degree, but of murder in the sec-
ond iegree. Mr.. Giles argument was an
eloquent cllort, lasting for about half an
hour during which time he gave d com
plete summary Of all the evidence adduced
in the case and closed With u plea for 4
verdict Of guilty as claimed by the State
Nj, Nandegrift opened for the defence
at 1850 o'clock
In his argument, Mr.. Vandegrift stated
that there was very little law involved in
the ease. He reviewed the evidence from
the beginning, and pointed out 10 the Jury
the points wherein he held that State WIS
veal in the presentment of its ease. lie
dwelt at length upon the testimony of
Sparks, one oil the States leading wit
nesses, and proceeded to declare lin In.
worthy Of belief. Without the testimony
OF Sparks the case of the State was weak.
Mr.. Nandegrift closed with an eloquent
Dlpn fir rho prisnnnr