The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1892-10-06
I'm Answering the Questions
Put to Him by Younger At
torneys.
Mr.. Albright Insinuated That
He Was the Custodian Of
Forged Papers,

Forged Papers,
And Now Robert and Peter Do NO
Speak as They Pass Blythe Spectator
Still Lingering for Glimpse at tn,
Buxson Form OF Mrs, Snyder.
When the News DEMOCRAT went Il
press Monday evening, the man who
caused so much delay in the case by
reason of being absent, when wanted
was on the stand. Appended is the SUBJ
stance Of the evidence given by the once
missing witness,
DAVID NJ. MERRILL.
Witness related In substance that In
1880. he had seen Mrs. Snyder at Albright's
house. Continuing the witness said: ~
saw Mrs. Snyder on the outside OF Al
bright's house. / watched her and she
went to the door and raped. Albright
came to the door and let her in. At an.
other date, later, in the spring of 1891, /
saw her 60 to his house again. My i'm.
preston was then that Albright was
standing in the doorway in the dark. My
impression now is that Albright was
not in the doorway. Mrs. Snyder
went to the door but cannot
swear that she went into the house.
thought that night that the object in the
door was Albright as thought saw his
house a number of times since and have
seen the same object and am now under
the impression that Albright was not In
the door, but saw shadow cast by the
electric light. / saw Mrs. Snyder 60 to
the house third time. was going to
church. Mrs. Snyder passed me on the
street and then came back, She then
went to 'Albrights door and knocked.
She then came out and walekd west,
returning little later. ! had in the
meantime put myself In position to see
what was going on. She came back and
time. She knocked but did not get in.
When she came out followed her. She
walked down past her husbands store
and got her little girl. / went into the
store and Mrbs Snyder came out and
lost sight of herr The first time saw
shadow / thought was Albright, II was
about an hour and a half before she came
out. l had been to church. l saw a man
across the street. "juken behind a tree.
! did not recognize him. The man fol-
lowed Mrs. Snyder to her house and
kept on the opposite side of the street and
her also TO her house. The man
who was "juking" behind the tree was
stranger and did not know him even by
sight. am the sexton OF the cemetery
and Albright is the superintendent. / am
in the employ OF the directors. ] have
been working for Albright as superinten.
dent for the past fourteen years.
An attempt to prove that Merrill went to
Pennsylvania on Saturday when he knew |
that the case had been set for the next |
week and that he was subpoenaed, was |
not allowed.
Mr.. Baldwin: "Mr. Merril, did you not |
have a conversation with me at my office |
\ md tat han hat Ma
20 into Albrighps house number Of
imes.n
Merrill: 81 did not tell you any such
.hing.n
Mr.. Baldwin; "Did you not tell me that
,ou saw Albright pee king outfrom behind
he blinds watching for her.n
Merrill: ~ do not remember telling
'on anything of that kind"
The witness denied number OF alleged
concerning the case which
were alleged to have been
leld between the witness and Mr.. Bald
vim.
Judge Day cross examined the witness
t some length but nothing Of interest
vas ELECTED.
On redirect examination Mr.. Baldwin
sked the witness concerning the trees
round the house. Witness had previously
aid that the electric light cast shadow
hrough the trees. MIR. Baldwin asked
rec that looked like Peter AIbright's
card. The witness opined not.
ia CLARK
'as called by the plaintiff and stated that
g had been practicing for 26 years and
uring that time he had had occasion to
xamine handwritings, for the purpose of
etermining whether or not they were
ritten by the same persons. He had ex-
mined the signatures in controversy and
ad compared them with other signatures
admitted to him, but he could not Identify
le signatures that he had examined and
Ad not marked them. On this account
nd because no other witnesses were
'ady TO be called, court adjourned at :15
clock, until o'clock Tuesday morning.
TUESDAY MORNING SESSION.
JuryInan John A. Bliss delayed the
pening OF court some timethmking that
,urt adjourned to meet at $3.50 o'clock
latead OF O'clock. Judge Taylor
ildly suggested that the juryman should
Foid such wrong impression.
.. y. Clark was called to the stand to
We testimony as an expert. Witness
I'd decided what signatures he had COM :
lred with the signatures on the note and !
70 alleged confession. Witness said that
bad examined the signatures and com, :
,red them putting In about two hours on !
10 work. There was not so much uni !
'rmity in the signatures as there would '
Atnrally be, considering the number of
mes the writer was In the habit Of writing 4
ID name. Concerning the ex-
naton OF the iine upon which the sigma. 2
ire was written, witness stated that il
rst have been done with the aid of a
Her, and so far as he was able to ascers
IN, II was made before the signature was
ade, as no laceration of the lines of the
gnatuEe were apparent on close exanip- | "
Ion. Witness was of the opinion that /,
o signature of the note was the sigma =
re Of Albright. Witness was asked :
compare the ink of the
tended line and the ink which O.
'ote the body of the note. He =
ii there was marked similarity though 4
0 ink with which the line was extended Il
Rht have been somewhat paler, Wit | ii
81 had met the two Chicago experts In
7. BaIdwin's Office and had talked with G
Bm TO some little extent about the notee. / n
did not remember whether they had -
amined any together or not. He could
I remember whether he had been sent NJ
TO meet the experts or had Just drop =,
d In. The cross examination conduct- h
by Judge Day was somewhat extended
/ nothing OF special interest was
cited. The witness thought Ii was the
By Of Albright to stop between the ri" 4,
ROBERT II. PoLoER, J. p,
dassiIlon who has interested himself II
The case as attorney was called and al
,mined By Mr. Baldwin. Witness said si
subsiance: II have been practicinR at m
; bar for about 10 years. j was con- si