St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-11-22

interviewed MIR. Lares at the Mer-
chants National bank at between IL
and 1 o'clock that day.
Ibid Lares say to you he was glad
you had come to seq him, as there were
one OF two inaccuracies which had been
given out and which he wished cor
reeted?"
State objects. Objection sustained
and exception noted.
Witness Resuming-He said he felt
slight movement, and turning quickly
he caught glimpse of tail man put
ting bag of gold under his coat
He could not describe the face of the
man and could say that he wore a
Prince Albert suit, high hat and was
tall. thin man; that he followed the
man. but couldn't shoot on account Of
the crowd; he could only see him from
the rear.
ID. }. Stanton-Am an attorney in this
city. Paper shown witness.l That Dor
ton of it from the word "for'' to the end
of the paper offered in evidence. Estate
objects. Sustained and exception noted.
loaned Witness Stanton So; presume
it was Aug. IA; with that paper before
me can swear it was that date.
CrosS-examined Il gave him the
money and as ne wanted TO give some
security he left it with me; the money L
gave him was afterwards repaid me.
[The memorandum was then offered in
evidence.
Butler here stated if Detectives Hoy
and Lawrence, of Minneapolis. were
here they would testify that when tn e
men were arrested there Fleury had $50
in gold upon his person besides some
silver-that they had searched Fleury
Aug. ana found the sum stated that
on Miller, Morris and Howard there
was found sum of money, they could
not state exactly what sum, but not
more than 500 oil them all. The state
| ment was accepted.
Joseph Jacobs sworn. Reside in the
| city; porter at Merchants National
bank; on Aug. Il last was in the bank
| for the purpose of taking money to the
First National bank as usual; it is part
of my duties to be there, and that day
saw a gentleman resembling d. j.
| Stanton (who had come forward and
| taken a stand before wltness); l think
L saw him there two or three days after
i i'll the bank; he denied that anybody
had called him back; no man, he said,
called me back; | might have stepped
| out few feet, but did not go far.
Ibid you meet Mr.. Stanton on the
day after the robbery in the lobby of
Merchants National bank, and didn't
he tell you that if it hadn't been for
him you would have lost the balance of
the money!"
Objection. Sustained and exception
noted
Some other questions relating to what
was said between Stanton and witness
were asked. Objection made and sus-
tained, and exception noted in each
| case.
| Defendant here rested his case, and
court took recess to Up. m.
! AFTERNOON SESSION.
Upon the opening of the court Attor-
ney Erwin rose. and producing most
voluminous typewriter document, pro-
| ceeded to read the same to the court. 1t
proved to be some thirty separate anu
distinct instructions, which he asked
the court to give the jury, in reference
to the law of the case. The document
was handed to the judge.
Mr.. Butler proceeded to address the
jury, and after a number of preliminary
remarks concerning the rights of the
| defendant, he said in substance:
Have our laws been violated in this
case? Has the Merchants National
bank been robbed by fraud and vio-
| lence. This is proved by the evidence
| on both sides. 1t has been proved that
defendant was in the First National
bank on that day. He referred to
Townley's testimony. and then took
up that of Messenger Lares
and recapitulated the leading
points. He explained to the
| jury that the state was debarred from
laying before them what Lares had told
Messrs. Seymour and Power of the
transaction, as it would be mere hear
say, and therefore inadmissible. He
characterized the cross-examination of
LareS as one of the most brutal and
sensational that ever occurred in court.
He alluded to the fierce onslaught made
upon him in the testimony of Mrs.
Steele and Willis Williams. He referred
to Calls testimony as to seeing the de-
PENDANT on that day-thereby corrob-
Grating the evidence given by Lares.
Circumstances point. he commended, with
unerring directness to defendant as tn c
party engaged in this robbery. He re-
called and reviewed the evidence relat-
ing to the acts and doingS of the de-
PENDANT and his partners in this city.
He said that on Aug. II last there was
not S400 in the whole crowd. He re-
ferred to Towards movements as shown
in the evidence. He referred to Meiggs'
maneuvers III engaging the eXpressman
to remove the baggage. He referred to
Meiggs' adroitness in getting the bag
gage to the depot and having it checked
without himself being seen in the
transaction. He argued that Meiggs'
| object in taking McCaffery with him to
Chicago was to have him receive the
baggage when delivered there without
his being seen in the matter.
| MIR. Butler closed his address at 3:45
p. II. His remarks were plain. forcible
and direct. He evinced thorough
familiarity with the evidence in the
case and handled the same logically and
effectively.
w. W. Erwin followed. A brief digest
| of his remarks is here given:
He insisted there was no evidence be-
fore the Jury on which to found the
| charge of conspiracy against these men.
The only charge upon which to lay the
foundation for proof of conspiracy is
their arrest in Minneapolis, upon what
charge is not known. Then you have
! Meiggs' talk with saloonkeeper about
/ Saltwater and White Bear. If the state
| has proved to your minds that Mr..
Fleuly was actually and personally en-
gagged in robbing the bank, then you
| have no need of the doctrine of con-
spiracy. In fact, conspiracy has nothing
to do with this case. The state is COM
!. PEELED to rely upon what they call the
inculpatory acts of these co-defendants
| after the commission of the act to prove