The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1895-02-25
Representative Nelson Again
Placed on Trial.
Witnesses Testify to His Receiving
Stolen Goods.
Matters brought Before the Appellate
and District Courts.

The trial OF Assemblyman John Nelson
for receiving stolen goods was begun
. second time before Mr.. Justice
Wilbour In the court OF common
pleas this morning. 1t will be re-
membered that Nelson, who is member
OF the State Legislature and promitent
43brcw politician of North End, Is
alleged to have bought scrap gold from
two young men, Felix Mclaughlin ana
William j. Wallace, knowing that THIS
that Mclaughlin was employed In
the Waite -Thresher Company, man
ufacturers Of gold articles OF
various sorts, during the months of Sep
tember, October and November, 1891, and
that he formed a compact with Wallace,
whereby McLaughlin took scrap gold
from his employer and turned IT over TO
Wallace who sold the gold to Nelson at
the latter's store on North Main street.
The first witness called by the prosecu-
tion was j. j. Butler, superintendent OF
the Waite -Thresher Company, who iden-
titled a part OF the gold found in Nelson's
possession as the property OF the COM
pany.
Henry q. Thresher testified that his
firm made q particular kind of "cane
head' pin, which was found in Nelson's
possession.
Felix Mclaughlin testified that he was
20 years old and that during October and
November he stole gold from the Waite,
Thresher Company. On the 23d of Nov
ember he took the gold found in Nelson's
possession and in evidence in the case.
He gave the gold which he stole
too4 1t to Nelson's shop. Mclaughlin
would remain outside while Wallace sold
the gold. Nelson would go into the back
shop with Wallace as soon as the gold was
brought In and remain there 10 or 20
minutes. Mclaughlin said that
instigation of Wallace. Mclaughlin,
in cross-examination, was questioned in
regard to his position In the case. Nc
Laughlin said that ne was under indict-
ment for larceny and had pleoded nolo
contendere. He was sure no promises OF
favor had been held out to him II he
would testify against the defendant.
William j. Wallsce said that he was 10
years OF age and mp to October last had
been In the employ of Waite -Thresher.
subsequently he went to work for Kent
Stanley. Wallace testified he had known
Nelson for nearly two years and had
begun to sell gold to him over a year ago.
1T various shops, but the jewellers would
not take IL. Nelson received it
readily and invited Wallace to come
around at any time. Nelson
said subsequently to Wallace that he
knew where the gold was coming from
take too much at time. A great many
times he would ask why the lots were SO
small and inquire IL "business" was dull.
Nelson wished to meet Mclaughlin,
but Wallace never brought him around.
On the night OF the 23rd of November
Wallace took the gold TO Nelson and then
detectives Parker and Swan appeared on
the scene and arrested McLaugh-
lin and Wallace. Wallace had
previously laid the gold on
the show case and Nelson took it In the
back room. In the back room Detective
Parker asked where the gold was and Nell
SON said he had got none. Detective Swan
then looked for the gold behind the door.
Nelson allowed 30 cents pennyweightifor
the gold and at some times would buy as
much as 160 pennyweights.
Detective Parker testified that he ar
rested Mclaughlin and Wallace on this
evening OF Oct. %, about 8 o'clock.
side, and then Parker went in
side and asked Wallace what he had
done with the gold. Wallace said
that he hadn't any gold and Nelson's
clerk said that he mad received no gold.
Then Parker and Swan went into the
back room where Nelson was writing.
Nelson said he had bought no gold and
knew OF none. Nelson further denied
having ever bought any gold OF Wallace.
At first he denied knowing Wallace but
Afterwards said that he had known him
under the name of Kelly. Nelson said
that he did not take the gold from the
counter to the back room.
subsequently Nelson admitted that he
took the package of gold into the back
store, and gave as the reason for not tel
ling the truth about it at first that he
was afraid.
At this point the court adjourned until
o'clock.
Appellate Division.
The following were heard before the
Appellate Court today:
William Eddy ct al, VS.. City OF Provi-
dence; heard on demurrer. &. M. Smith
for complainant; City Solicitor for re-
spondent.