The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1895-07-05
DIAMOND ROBBERY.
Frank UImau, Apparently a Strong
Witness, One OF the Defendants.

Frank Ulman and Minnie Ranode, for
the larceny of diamond ring from
Henry Q. Whittier, was begun this morn
ing In Judge Wilbur's division. Frank
Ulman is now serving sentence, having
pleaded guilty to the charge against him
and was witness for the State in today's
trials. Minnie Kanode was not present,
nor has she yet pleaded 10 the indict-
ment found against her. The Attorney
General thought she was still in Jail, for
another offense, but 1t became known
this morning that she had been dis
charged from confinement some time ago
and has since kept out OF the way Of the
officers Of the law.
Assistant Attorney General Du bois
represented the State; John Il. Conley,
Runuschke, and Charles Il. Stearns Mrs.
Ullman.
John Regan, a clerk In tho store Of ii.
Z. Whittier, testified that about quarter
of o'clock on the evening of April 20
kunuschke, Frank Ulman, Emma Ul-
man and Minnie Kanode came into the
store, and one OF them asked TO see some
diamond rings. He requested the four
persons to step into Mr.. Whittier's pri-
vate office, and they doing SO MIR. Whittier
complied with their request to look at
the rings. On cross examination by Mr..
Steafns he stated that he took a tray of
rings into the private Office and the sub
stitution of a ring with piece of glass
instead of diamond was not discovered
until the following Tuesday morning.
Henry O. Whittier testified he waited on
the party and while his back was turned
a plated ring with a glass setting was
substituted by some one of the party for
diamond ring In one OF the trays
valued at $35. He recognized Ulman,
Mrs. Ulman and KunIschke as three OF
the parties who were in his store when
the rings were exchanged.
~ Gafafain (lnGtina nf the Fifth Gfotfnv. tao
Tilted that Frank Ulman told him that
the diamond ring that had been stolen
would be found In his home In a bu-
reau drawer enclosed in an envelople
with his marriage certificate He also
testified that in the lower court Emma
Ulman had said that on the afternoon of
April 26 she, Kunuschke and the Kanode
woman, as well as Mrs. Ulman's husband
went out to steal.
Detective Peter B. Cannon testified
that he had gone to Frank Ulman's
home and found the diamond ring as
Ulman had told him TO. On cross-ex-
animation by Mr.. Conley he stated that
Kunuschke denied any knowledge of the
theft and protested his innocence.
Detective Merrill said that Frank Ul-
man stated after his arrest that all went
out on the afternoon in question to steal.
Mrs. Ulman had stated at police head
quarters that Kunuschke had done the
"shift.n
= This witness as well as other witnesses
for the government had their stories as
TO the statements of Mrs. Ulman in the
lower court slightly shaken by her coun-
sci, Mr.. Stearns.
The last witness for the State was Frank
Ulman.- He gave his residence as New
York city and claimed TO have led an
honest life until he met Kunuschke,
about five or six weeks before his arrest
and that the substituting a cheap
ring for q diamond one was suggest
ed by Kunuschke. The latter told
him that he knew Pawtucket party who
would take the diamond ring and pay
cash for it. Kunuschke had bought the
ring that was substituted for 80 cents.
On cross-examination by Kunuschke's
attorney, he stated that in New York he
was employed as bookkeeper for the
firm of l. Ulman Il Co., located at s76
Broadway, who did q general auctioneer-
ing business, HIS father being the senior
member of the firm. He came here on q
admitted be was addicted TO the use of
opium; that he took the diamond ring
and substituted the other one and retained
the former In his possession. He also
stated in answer to question put by
MIR. Conley that he had been married five
weeks at the time of the theft.-tfH4aa
neither in his direct nor crossexamination
made any reference to his wife.
The first witness called by the defense
was Charles j. Kunuschke. He testified
that he first met Ulman at the corner OF
Burrill aud Broad streets, and as Ulman
wanted TO purchase opium they went into
Charles Yew's joint. He then met Ulman
frequently, calling at his home about five
times, and on the day OF the theft,
Ulman, when going past Whittier's store,
saw pair of cuff buttons, and said he
would go in and buy them, when Ulman
and the ladies went into the store. The
former, much to the surprise of the wit
ness, asked to see some diamond rings
and made the substitution referred to.
He denied ever having told Ulman he
could sell the ring In Pawtucket. His
testimony was badly shaken by the cross
examination CT the assistant attorney
general. The witness in reply to a ques-
tion put by that official that he had
never been convicted or arrested for steal
ing. When a complaint 10 which he had
pleaded guilty charging him with stealing
cloth was produced, he said he pleaded
guilty to being in the store when the
cloth was stolen, but not 10 stealing 1t.
A decree was entered in the case of
Edward EastnI&n vs.. william e. Eccfcston
appointing Charles II. Salisbury master
to take an accounting.
George Lewis Cooke has been excused
at his own request from service on the
committee TO examine candidates for adj
nilsson to the bar, and John T. Blodgett
has been appointed i'm his place.