St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-01-12
he INTENDED TO KILL.
cR.H3ERLAW SAYS HE WIS VERY
ANGRY AT FIRST.
WANTED TO SUE HoLBRooK.

Tho Defendant in the Notorious
Case still on the Stand-fe
Was Taken Ill and the Court
Adjo:rneI = Holbrook Again
C:oss- Examined-rhe Trial Is
Drawing to Il Close.
ills likely the Chamberlain trial will
not last many more days, for the de-
Tense is about at the enl of its string or
witnesses. The defendant was Oh the
stand again yesterday and went over
his story at the Instance of the prose-
cutting attorney, who failed, however, to
shake the testimony already given. Oar
in~ the trial Chamberlain complained OF
being i'll, and at , O'clock it was found
necessary to adjourn, physicians atfi-
daylt furnishing proof OF the witness
claims. This morning the ease will go
on again. Among other questions, the
prosecuting attorney asked Chamber
lain what he intended to do with Hol-
brook when he found him in Such q
compl omising position with the woman
he called wife. The reply was:
Il intended TO get divorce from my
wife, and thought | would need the
things took in evidence against him."
I'm evidence, but how? Did you
think that you would sue him?"
Possibly"
You wanted to sue him for bringing
ruin to your family?"
Yes, perhaps"
Your wife WAS terribly frightened,
was she not?" asked Mr.. Peterson,
sneering little.
Yes, sir. She was very much ex-
cited"
.She was engaged in death struggle
with you?"
ny cS; she struggled terribly hard. but
held her. l snapped the revolver
twice before it went Off, and then
realized what l was doing, and, point
ing it down TO the floor l shot it off.
didn't want to commit murder
How was it you stated in your COM
plainu for divorce that you were mar
ried in Milwaukee," was asked of the
witness.
why at Waverly we agreed to say
we were married at Milwaukee, and 1
SO told Mr.. Rees."
The state asked to have this testi-
mony stricken out as not being proper,
and the court ordered it done. The jury
had heard the statement, however, SO
the mischief was done.
The defense rested for the nonce, and
Plaintiff HolbrOok was put on the stand
III rebuttal. The defense endeavOred 10
make him deny his former testimony,
but the old gentleman stuck to every
thing he had testified to. Mr.. Brockett
asked him:
did you ask Mr.. Dawson to lea We
the city i'll order that he might not ties
tify?"
NO, SIR"
"Did you not ask some one else to go
to hlm?"
mo, sir"
did you not ask Free man P. Lane to
go to him OH such an errand"'
No, sir, did not.
Mayor EuStis was recalled, and asked
if Mrs. Chamberlain had not made a
confession to him. A SkirmSh between
the attorneys as 10 whether this was
permissible followed. the defense pro-
testing vigorously. The court ruled for
the state, and the mayor proceeded to
relate the old story over again. Supt.
Smith. Inspector Hoy and Mr.. Moulton
were questioned on unimportant mat
tiers, and then Freeman Lane was asked
to take the stand. He cOntradicted the
statements ascribed to him by Chamber
lain. and then to the defense admitted
he was Holbrook'S private attorney,
that he had been close attendant of
the trial, and had consulted with the
prosecuting attorney. The court then
adjourned.