St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-02-28
DAHL HELD UP HIMSELF
rs WHAT DETECTIVE M'GWN HAS
ABOUT DECIDED.
THEORIES FAIL THROUGH.

Chief or Detectives Pinned His
Faith on the Handkerchief
Found, and Had a New War
Larceny, but the wipe" Was
Found TO Bear Dahl's Name.
William Smith and James Church
were given an examination before Judge
Twohy yesterday afternoon on the
charge Of stealing coat, hat aud neck
scarf owned by ". K. Edwards. The
two men were arrested on Feb. 10 with
eight others in house on East Thir-
teenth. the ten gathered IN by the police
at the time being charged with COM
plicity in the assault and robbery of K.
J. Dahl. There being no evidence to
connect any of the parties with the
assault and robbery they were
discharged. Smith and Church
we've, however, rearrested or a
charge of petit larceny, coat said to
have been worn by Smith and hat by
Church being identified by w. r. Ed
wards as stolen from Fourth street
restaurant on Feb. II. In the mean
time Detective Gruber was put to work
on the case, and he sprung a red-fire
sensation by having w. G. Edwards
identify the handkerchief with which
Dahl claimed he was gagged as one
which was in the pocket of his sons
coat when it was stolen from the res
taurant on Feb. IL.
The handkerchief was taken to Mrs.
al nt.Ac 70 4. 81 |. ka~ t,n
longing to her husband. She, however.
at once decided that it was not the right
one. A visitor who had been stopping
at the Edwards house stated that he had
missed one of his handkerchiefs. and OH
comparing the one left by Dahl with
the police with the others still in his
possession the gentleman identified it
as his. This the detectives at once said
was valuable clue to the persons who
committed the assault and robbery.
Their theory was that young Edwards
had by mistake taken the handkerchief
belonging to the visitor at his house,
and that it was in his coat when
stolen from the restaurant. Smith or
Church, according to the theory,
had stolen the coat, and when
they held up Dahl used the
handkerchief to gag their victim So
confident was Detective McGinn that
in Smith and Church he had the right
parties who robbed Dahl that the war
rant for petit larceny was withdrawn
and one substituted charging them with
larceny of Edwards coat from a build
ing. This was done in order to hold
them to the grand jury and allow the
sleuths to work longer at the case.
Yesterday, however, the fine.spun
theories all fell to the ground. for
while the witnesses were present to
swear to the Identification of the hand
kerchief which would connect Smith
and Church with the Dahl robbery,
some one suggested that the handker-
chief be washed. This was the end of
the matter, for when an application Of
soap and water was applied to the
wipe" there was found the name E. j.
Dahl marked with ink in the corner.
Assistant County Attorney Donnelly,
who from constant association with the
detectives at work on the case had
taken some stock in the theory and
chain of circumstantial evidence, was
upset by the name OH the handkerchief
and lost all interest in the case.
The examination of the two men for
the larceny of the overcoat and hat was
partly tried yesterday afternoon and
continued to this morning.
The police, not in the least discon
certed by the outcome of their theories
in the highway robbery case, now insist
that Dahl was not robbed at all, and as
proof of their statements exhibit the
wipe" with the name E. j. Dahl on
the corner. The theory now advanced
by Detective McGinn is that Dahl
assaulted himself, beat himselftever the
head, kicked himself in the side with
such force as to break two ribs and then
laid down on the sidewalk and waited,
insensible, until the police could find
him