St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-12-06


"Do you recolIect when Stanton took
you out of the gutter and took you
home?''
81 do.''
AFTERNOON SESSION.
G. A. Severance, called by the defense,
said: Live in st. Paul; lawyer; lived at
Dne time in Mantorville; knew Darwin
L. Stanton as boy; witness lived in
Mantorville for two years, and anne to
St. Paul fifteen years ago; never
heard anything against Stanton's repu-
tatioa; came to st. Paul in 1885,"
William F. Meek, sworn: Manager
of the c. F. Adams company, 323 st.
Peter street; know Stanton, and have
employed the young man for short
time; have not had much opportunity
to observe his reputation for truth and
veracity; never heard anything against
him.
Robert E. Witty sworn: Am in the
printing business at Wacouta and
Fourth streets since 1884: have known
Stanton since the beginning of the
year 1891; he has worked for me at
different times: know his reputation
for truth and verscity to be good in this
community; have had occasion to OBJ
serve it. On cross-examinatiou witness
testified that when Stanton worked
he worked regularly. To Buffers ques-
ton as to whether he wSS not in the
habit of neglecting business and gam
bling. Erwin objected and the Court
sustained him.
Cfofn nd hnr OF Cd
and Attorney Johns asked the court to
grant the tiIIrty-nine instructions to the
jury asked for at the first trial. Por-
tions of these the court incorporated in
his own charge.
JURY ADDRESS.
County Attorney Butler, at 1922 p. m,
began his closing address to the jury.
He spoke of the difference in the laws
of the states, and showed that this state
was more mereiful to the accused than
other states by giving the closing or
summing up to the defendant. He
argued that the defendant was guilty,
and that this was proved by direct evil
dence. He referred to the evidence
cerroborative of Lares. and particularly
to that of Gall, and then went over the
evidence of Messenger Lares in detail.
He referred to and commented, as in
the first trial, upon that now famous
cross-examination of Lares by Attorney
Erwin. and again denominated the
same as brutal and uneXampled.
He also commented upon Mrs. Steeie'S
and Reporter Williams testimony and
argued that Lares, whatever he had
said, had been misrepreSented or mis-
understood by these two witnesses. He
next took up Stanton's story and de-
nounced him bitterly, saying that his
statements were false and wholly I'M
reliable. He insisted that Stanton,
standing where he says he was, could
not have seen the man going down the
stairs. He then entered upon minute
and exhaustive rehearsal of the whole
mass of the states testimony, emitting
only minor details. The closing part of
his address was earnest, and at all
times was listened to with the utmost
attention. He closed shortly after 4
p. m.
Attorney Johns then rose to address
the jury. On but one occasion hereto
fore had he stood before jury in the
role of prosecutor fer the state. Then
he realized the responsibility of the
we'll being of the prisoner at the bar.
He would say to the jury the state
wants no victim. He rehearsed the
duties and responsibilities of the county
attorney at considerable length, and
said that officer was the attorney OF
uoubt. He could not understand why
McGinn had not graced the witness box
In this case. Who are the attorneys of
doubt in this case? Is it the attorney
for the state, who has sought to re-
press the truth and sought to
close the doors of honest investigation
The question is, who took that money
from the bank or assisted in doing so
ON Aug. ID last? Did Stanton take it?
Did Lares take it? Did the messenger
from the Scandinavian bank take it?
Is it worth while to analyZe LareS' teS-
tlmOnJ? Is it worth while to go further
in this part of the case? Where is that
Prince Albert coat? Is it in that trunk?
The Prince Albert coat that Lares
swearS Fleury had on the day of the
robbery? Lares is the creature of cir
cumstances, and has been forced &c
testify as he did. Did he lie when he
told his story to Mrs. Steele? Did she
make that story and detail it here to
subvert justice? What had she or Mr.
Williams to gain in coming here tC
Stanton had told the same story twice
In the same way, which was not posi-
bic if he were not telling the truth.
They have made a great hue and CRY
about an alleged remark of Stanton
"What is there in it for me?" which he
is charged with saying to Seymour.
But even if he had said the words
charged against him, it could not affect
the truth of his testimony.
The Jury wants to know whetherStan
ton acted in good faith or whether he act
ed in bad faith. The state.haS brough
witnesses here to condemn Stanton, ant
the only derelictions proved against hin
and his character were that Stanton
when youth, had quarreled with hi
Sunday school teacher, and that he
Stanton, had contracted debt to tn,
amount of $50.
1t is the undisputed evidence brough
out by the state that Meiggs just befor
noon ON that day was at the house OF
Canada street, nine blocks away from
the scene. 1t is simply physical in
possibility that he could have gotten t
Canada street from the bank in tina
time.
Judge Kelly occupied an hour in de
iivering the charge to the jury. 1t wa
substantially, with only few alters
tions, his charge in the first case, ali
was very comprehensive.
Erwin read long series of objection
to different parts of the Judges charge
all'of which were denied and exception
noted by the court stenographer.
AT $50 the jury retired TO their room
In charge OF the bailiff.
The Modern Mother
Has found that her little ones are in
nrOYpd more by the nlpaSant laXatiV