The Roanoke daily times. (Roanoke, Va.) 1895-1897, 1895-09-27

SAN FRANcIsco. Sept. 26.-The key
stone in the arch of Durrants alibi
orumbled and fell to-day. The witness
upon whom the attorneys for the de-
tense depended mos. to sustain their
contention that DurrAnt was attending
lecture at Cooper Medical College at
at the hour when Blanche Lamont was
murdered gave disappointing testimony.
lnstead Of testifying that Durrant was
present at the lecture, as Attorney
Duprey said DE-. Cheney would do. the
Doctor said he had no recollection OF
seeing the young medical student.
TO Offset this reverse the defense
gained only one point, the admission as
an exhibit OF the rollcall book at the
college, in which Durrant was recorded
as present at the lecture given ON the
afternoon OF April 3. The prosecution
holds the rollcall book In little esteem
from the fact that 1t will place witt
nesses on the stand to prove that Dur
rant frequently asked his classmates to
answer To his name when he was ab.
sent, and that they complied with his
request.
The crush in the corridors at the en-
trance to the court was greater to-day
than upon any other day since the trial
began. Men and women fought for adj
mission while the sheriff and a score of
deputies struggled as desperately to
keep the Gro wd back. at times the con-
fusion outside was 30 great that the
proceedings OF court were interrupted.
AT length Judge Murphy summoned the
sheriff and ordered him to clear the cor
ridors. II the sheriff's force was insult
hcient the judge said he would call on
the chief OF police for q squad of men to
execute the order.
Sergeant Reynolds, the police officer
who conducted the search Of Emanuel
Church after the discovery OF the bodies
of Blanche Lamont and Minnie Will
liame, IVES the first witness called to
the stand. After describing the furni
ture and other articles found in the
pas tor's study, he was asked about the
chisel marks found in the door leading
to the beliry. The door and casing
with the body of his victim were
brought into the court and formed one
OF the most interesting exhibits pro.
duced.
The witness testified that the marks
corresponded in size to chisel found
in a tool box in Rev. ] ohn George Glib
sons study. The witness WAS also
asked to identify g shoe, supposed to
have been stained with blood, which
YVES found in the PASTORS study. AS
Sergeant Reynolds did not know to
whom the shoe belonged, Sergeant Burk
was called, but he was also in ignorance
with regard to the ownership OF the
shoe.
DR.. w. Cheney, Of Cooper Medical
College, who was supposed to be the
mainstay of the defense, was the next
witness. He said the lecture on April
began at $3.50 and lasted until AIS
O'Clock, at the close of which the roll
WAS called. The witness did not know
whether Durrant was present or not, as
the roll was called by DR.. E. P. Gray.
DR.. Cheney was mporarily excused
and DR.. Gray summoned.
DR.. Gray did not whether Durrant WAS
present or not, but assumed that he WAS
from the fact that he was not marked
absent on the roll call. Questioned
with regard to the roll-call book the
witness admitted that the entry Of April
8 was not an original record, as II has
been transferred from another page sub
sequent to that date for the purpose of
rectifying an error. On this ground the
district attorney moved that the book be
not admitted as an exhibit, but the OBJ
lection WAS overruled.
DR.. Cheney was then recalled and re-
tterated his statement to the effect that
he had no recollection of seeing Dur
noon of April 3. Attorney Duprey was
plainly nettled at the conf CT between
what the defense had promised DR..
Cheney would testify to what he really
did say, so another effort was made.
The witness was asked if in converse
ton wi b ono of the attorneys for the
defense he 1.-THE witness) had not said
that he believed that Durrant was
present at the lecture. The court asked
Attorney Duprey IL he WAS trying to
impeach his own witness, and then sus-
tanned an objection interposed by the
prosecution.
On CROSS examination District Attor-
ney Barnes tried to show that studen ts
at the college frequently had their class
mates answer to their names at roll call
when they were absent The witness
WAS asked IL in his experience as an in
structor at the college he had not be-
come aware OF the existence OF such a
practice.
The defence objected to the question
on account Of i,s sweeping nature. The
court sustained the objection, but init.
mated that the question might be asked
In proper form. Two or three more
questions OF similar import were asked,
but objections were sustained in each
case. Court adjourned until to- morrow
morning with the cross.examination of
DR.. Cheney still incomplete,
Mysterious Disappearance.
ST.. JOSEPH, Mo-, Sept. GA great