The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1895-03-01
TOLD BY THE DEFENSE
Yesterdays Testimony In The Trial Of
Charles |. Johnson.
HE DENIES THE CRIME
The Story Related BY Witnesses
for the Defendant Directly Con-
tradicted the evidence Intro
duced BY the Prosecution.

in the Johnson case cited authorities in
support of their position taken yesterday
that Col. L. c. Marshall could take the
stand TO Impeach the testimony of Mike
Farrell, who stated that he saw Mcleod
lying in bed entirely dressed on the night
of the fire. After hearing the authorities
Judge Woody allowed Colonel Marshall
TO take the stand and he testified that
Farrell had told him IN his office, IN the
presence of witnesses, that he, Farrell,
knew nothing about the fire or about Nc
Leod. Farrell had come in from n late
trip aud had gone to bed and knew moth
ing until he was awakened by the cry of
fire.
Several prominent business and profess
sional men were then called by the de-
Tense, who testified that they would not
believe Lewis Bumbaugh under oath.
Attorney Musgrave testified that he
knew Bumbaugh we'll; had never had any
political differences with him; Bumbaugh
mad assisted him in several political cam
paigns; but he would not believe him;
thought his word was no good. James
Fussy testified that he believed Bum
baugh's word to be worthless, but adj
mitted on cross-examnation that he had
had a personal disagreement with Bum
baugh.
Bumbaugh is tho witness who sworo
that johnson had offered him $50 to leave
town before the trial and whose story was
contradicted yesterday by Martin Conkey.
Charles Vaughn, who was driver of tho
mail wagon at the time of the fire, was
the best witness that has been called yet.
This is a fact, not an opiuion.) He testl-
fled that Mcleod had gone to bed, un-
dressed, soon after 10 o'clock on the night
Of ha hot L. "a, A
home before that; that Johnson was not
at the stable at IL :55 o'clock That night.
He then told the story of the fire, sub
stantially as Mcleod related it yesterday.
On cross-examinatIon, he admitted that
Mcleod could have gotten up later with
out his knowing it, but his statements
could not be shaken IN the least.
! The diary of witness Loughborough has
been examined to-day by numerous inter-
ested parties. The book which contains
the entries regarding the fire is n small
memorandum book ana covers a period
from March 4, 1913, to March %. The en-
tries on the 10Th, 18th and 18th occupy
nearly half the book. The fire occurred
on March II. In another place is a record
of transaction involving several
thousand dollars, but this is given q space
of but few lines. The diary's account
of the events of the day preceding the fire
are detailed and peculiar. Instead of
saying that he left the Johnson stable at
about midnight, Mr.. Loughborough's
record is very precise and fixes his de-
parture at IL :55 o'clock. This. (ls a fact)
stamps Mr.. Loughborough as very
accurate man.
Mr.. Loughborough's testimony was Sc
verely attacked to-day by numerous wit
e.. he, If.
the evidence mentioned above, as to tho
time of Johnson's return home on the
night before the fire, II was shown by
other witnesses that he was not at tho
stable after 10 o'clock and he was traced
all the way home by various incidents. tie
stopped at the Headquarters saloon and
then walked across the bridge, where no
overlook a negro with whom he walked
70 within n block of home and he spoke 10
the people in the house next his as he
passed there a few minutes later. The
time OF his arrival at home was fixed by
his wife and Miss Renck, who lives with
the Johnsons, as not later than 10 o'clock.
This testimony is in direct contradiction
the statement of Mr.. Loughborough that
he left Johnson at the stable at IL :55
o'clock, "by my watch"
Mr.. Loughborough further stated, and
his diary corroborated him, that he left
Missoula at o'clock in the morning. The
defense to-day called Chief Dispatcher
Donkin, who produced n train sheet of
that day, which showed that the train left
at is o'clock that morning.
Miss Renick's testimony was important.
She told the story of the events at the
johnson home that night in manner
that was convincing and admitted of no
question. Cross examination produced
no effect upon her story save to strengthen
IL.
Charles L. johnson, the defendant, took
the witness stand soon after o'clock
and his examination and cross-eNamina-
ton were not completed until after
o'clock tonight, the court being adjourned
from to o'clock. Johnson told of leav-
ing the stable aud going home, as the
previous witness had related, and he said
he was awakened 10y his wife when the
fire whistle blew. Together they went
TO the widow and looked towards town,
but saw no evidence OF fire and went back
to bed. he was awakened at about
o'clock, he thought, 10y Messrs. Sterling
and Thompson, who drove over from
Town to his house TO inform him of the
fire. With them he drove back 10 town
and went at once to the stable, where he
made an examination OF the premises.
lie saw Hawkes. in the second story of
the building. The latter asked hlm whose
was tue can Of coal oil standing near
where the fire started. lie supposed then
that 1t was his, and he said so, but he
learned afterwards it was not and he
found his IN a closet down stairs. lie
made an effort 10 find out the incendiary.
but had been unsuccessful. lie told of
the conversation with Bumbaugh ia the
same way as related by Conkey. He de-
MED the story of Farrell as To a CONVERSE
ton regarding the cause Of he fire.
The cross-eNaminatIon was very severe
Il was conducted by Judge Reeves and
lasted long time. Johusou's story was
not shaken and he was not ratified IN the
least.
Thomas Bassler testified regarding the
water pipes al the stable, that D. was
necessary 10 shut of Jlr water iu winter
10 preVent the pipes from freez NJ