Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-07-14
THE RICHARDS MURDER CASE.
"Cockey" Fenner's Hearing Re-
suits in a Big Sensation.


His Counsel Asks Questions of tho Muir.
dored wonian's Husband That tho
Latter Refuses to Answer,
ELKToN, July Sat last somebody has
been brought before The bar of justice in
connection with the murder Of Mrs.
Jennie Richards, wife of Granville Rich
ards, which stirred up the entire state on
the 3D. Of April last year. Samuel, or
"Cocley" Fenner, who was brought here
from Pennsylvania few days aso, was
placed before the bar this morning, and
preliminary hearing of the case was begun.
Ex. United States District Attorney Thos.
g. Hayes, of Baltimore, is his counsel,
and he created decided sensation near
the close of the day. The husband of the
murdered woman was on the Witness
stand all day, and he was rigidly cross ex-
amined by MIR. Hayes. Richards declined
to answer certain interrogatories put by
Mr.. Hayes, and, in demanding that his
questions be answered. that gentleman, in
u vigorous speech, declared that they bore
very important part in the case, as he
proposed TO prove that Mrs. richards was
murdered not by stranger, whose home
was in Pennsylvania, but by man
thoroughly acquainted with the house in
which the deed was committed, and by a
man who lived in the house.
Mr.. Richards detailed the circumstances
of the murder of his wife, after which Mr.
Hayes took him III hand and asked him if
he had employed any other counsel in the
case than William S Evans, who was
assisting States Attorney Crothers. Mr..
Richards declined to answer.
Mr.. Hayes--WhOm did you intimate,
directly or indirectly, had any connection
with the murder?
Mr.. Richards--I decline to answer.
Mr.. Hayes then asked the witness
whether he was assaulted and robbed two
or three years ago.
Mr.. Evans objected to this question and
a lively tilt between the opposing counsel
| followed
Justice Scott ordered the discussion to
| cease, SAYING: "Ihere is too mitch bicker-
| ing between you lawyers. Why don't you
| bring ont the evidence you want nc to act
upon Too much time has already been
| wnSted.h
MIR. Evans--All we want is for tho
| justice to decide whether the witness shall
or shall not answer, or who is right in the
| matter.
Justice Scott am not supposed t.
know anything about court rulings. As
| FAR US deciding who is right is concerned,
suppose that you are both right. Laugh
| ter.
Mr. Hayes then arose and created sen
sation by declaring that his case would bt
| very materially affected by having his
questions answered. They bore on very
important matters. He desired to prove
that the man who lived in the house AT thu
time OF the murder of Mrs Richards knew
more about the murder Than anybody else
lie stated that all the evidence pointed
eonclusively 10 the fact that all the tools
and instruments used in opening the collar
door, breaking open the desk III the din,
ing-room ami the chisel said TO have been
used in beating Richards over the ankle
were the property Of Richards himself
and that everything pointed also to tn,
conclusion that no one could have gnineC
access to the house in the manner alleged
by Richards, except enc well aGquaintet
with the house.
MIR. Evens replied hotly that he was sur
prlsed at this olitburst OF MIR. Hayes ant
the reckless charges and Innuendoes.'
He said 1t WAS an unNarranted attack anC
Il malicious one.
Justice Scott decided that the witness
mnstanswer the questions propounded by
Mr.. Hayes.