The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1894-10-10
HEARD IN COURT,
The Defense in the Mathes Murder
Trial Introduce Testimony.

The case OF the State against James b.
Mathes, indicted for the murder OF Monk
Saunders at Narragansett Park, June 3,
was continued this morning in the COM
mon pleas division OF the Supreme Coure,
Mr.. Justice Wilbur presiding. The prose-
cution closed with the testimony OF seve-
raj unimportant witnesses. The outcome
of this testimony was principally to es-
tablish the fact OF the shooting, which is
not denied by the defendant.
The defense is along he line of self de-
Tense. 1t appeared in testimony this
morning that on the morning of the
shooting Saunders and another negro at
tackled without provocation the defend
ant, stoning him and otherwise assaulting
him, thus placing him in great bodily
fear. Monk had said to Mathes, 81 will
cut your heart out" This so terrified
Mathes that he sought protection from
the negro prosecutors.
Ralph Blacs stated that Mathes gave
him the revolver after the shooting, re-
marking, at was his life or mine; / had
TO do IT."
Edward A. Chapman testifies that he
kept a restaurant at the park a. the time
OF the tragedy. The defendant ate break
fast there on the morning of the 9th of
June at which time two coored men at
tackled him, throwing glass at him and
hitting him with bottle.
Other witnesses testified to the serious
character OF the assault made upon
Mathes whose hand was bleeding and cut
and who was put into state of great
terror.
The defendant took the stand and
stated that he went to town after the
morning assault. He was nervous and
frightened. Fearing he would be killed
he bought n revolver and returned to the
park. lie said that he did not know that
Monk was in the stall, but visited it by
accident. As soon as tho colored man
saw him he raised club to strike
him, aud in self-defense he shot
Monk. He did not have time to take the
revolver out of his pocket, the assault was
SO quickly made.
The witness told straight forward
story. and it seems probable that the ver-
dict will be no greater than manslaugh ghter
at the most.
Civil Cases.
Before Mr.. Justice Rogers the suit OF
Elizabeth II. Jones, appellant, against
William w. Rickard, executor, is being
heard. This Is an appeal from 81 e~~pro-
batting of the will of the late Phebe f..
Jones, by the terms of which she gave all
OF her estate TO her attorney,W. w. Rick
ard Elizabeth Il. Jones is the sister in
law OF the deceased, and the grounds OF
appeal are undue influence. The attor-
neys are A. ID. Bean for the plaintiff and
w. II. Pierce for defendant.
Ia The appellate division OF the court
the suit Of Jonas Il. Bucking ham VS.. John
Il. Buckingham is in progress. This re-
lates TO right OF way from a highway in
harrington to the shore, and IL is claimed
by the plaintiff hat his way has been OBJ
structed by the defendant.
The calendar for tomorrow follows:
tCommon Pleas Division
4520. Ora Heald VS.. w. G.. Gurney, APP
pellant. Attorneys. Osfield, ir., for
plaintiff; w. w. Robinson for defendant.
5g22. Thomas Griffin vs.. Old Colony
Railroad Company. Attorneys-Page a.
ow n for plaintiff; ii. W. Hayes for de-
feudant.
1893. Congdon,' Aylsworth & Go. W.
Morris Slender, appellant. Attornuys-C
A. Aldrich for plaintiff; McGuinness a.
Doran for defendant.
tAppelIan Dfvisionl
1903. exceptions, e:c). Frank G. shat
ford vs.. Joseph Brown. Attorneys Bas-
sett a Mitchell for plaintiff; ID. ii. Shea
han for defendant.
1859. exceptions, etc). Joseph A.
Brown vs.. Michael Nancy. Attorneys
ID. III. Sheahan for plaintiff, Bsssett a
| Mite hell for defendant.