The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-10-22

his testimony will be brief if taken at
all, and then the prosecution will be-
gin the introduction of testimony in
rebuttal. Although some of the most
important evidence on the part of the
prosecution is yet to be submitted from
the present outlook the case will go to
the jury at the close of next week.
Now that the attorneys for Durrant
have practically closed their case the
impression prevails that the defense
has materially strengthened the case
of the prosecution. 1t is the opinion of
those who have watched the trial that
the defense has failed to establish a
single fact that Attorney Deuprey in
his opening statement said he would
show. Although it was announced that
an alibi would be proved for the pris-
oner, not a witness has been called to
swear that Durrant was elsewhere
than at the Emanuel Baptist church
on the afternoon that Blanche Lamont
was murdered. Failing to show that
Durrant was not at the church, the
defense has attacked the credibility of
the witnesses who testified that they
saw him in that vicinity in company
with Miss Lamont The latest at
tempt of this kind was made this at
ternoon when DR.. G. c. Mcdonald was
called to the stand to give expert tes-
timony on the Authorizations of elderly
women. Attorney Dickinson asked the
doctor if it was not fact recog-
nized by the medical profession that in
time of great excitement over an eX-
traordinary crime, elderly women often
| became impressed with the deluslon
that they had personal knowledge of
the existence of alleged facts. An OBJ
lection to the question was sustained
in its first form as the couSt said 1t
had not been shown that the witness
was competent to give expert testimony
on the subject. After a proper foun-
dalton for the question had been laid
the objection was overruled.
The witness said that under such
circumstances people often become
Possessed of Various Decisions.
But denied that elderly women were
more likely to have such Authorizations
than anybody else The question was
! plainly for the purpose of throwing dis
! credit on the testimony of Mrs Leak
and Mrs. Vogel, two of the strongest
witnesses for the prosecution. Mrs
! Leak, who lives opposite Emanuel
| church, testified that on the afternoon
! of the murder she saw Durrant and
Miss Lamont enter the church. Mrs.
| Vogel said she saw Durrant standing
! school for an hour waiting for
/ Blanche Lamont, and that when she
! came out he boarded a car with her
and rode away in the direction of the
/ church.
! Charles T. Lehman, who, it is as
I serted by the defense, was mistaken for
/ Durrant by Pawn.broker Oppenheim,
proved a disappointing witness. He
/ made several conflicting statements,
! oh, no r
was in the afternoon instead of the
morning that he tried to pawn a ring
at Oppenheim's. In a letter written to
/ Durrant's attorneys some time ago
Lehman said he tried to pawn the ring
in the morning a t the very hour Dur
rant is said to have entered the place.
Attorney Dickinson intimated that he
had made conflicting statements.
! The defense sought to show by Rob
ert \. Lynch Rev. J.. George Gibson s
private secretary, that he gave Miss Gun
/ bingham, a newspaper reporter. the tlrst
/ clew TO the fact that Mrs. Leake had
seen Durrant and Miss Lamont enter
/ the church on the afternoon of April 3.
The object Of the question was to i'm
peach one feature of Mrs. Leaks testi-
his zeal to convict Durrant, had been
instrumental in making public damaging
] evidence against him. Lynch said he did
/ not tell Miss Cunningham of what Mrs.
/ Leak had SEEN as at that time he did
not know that Mrs. Leak had any in
formation on the case.
Attorney Dickinson was sworn and took
the stand himself for the purpose OF
identifying leather strap, bearing
/ Blanche Lamonts name which he said
was sent TO him by mail last July. He
said he did not know who sent the strap.
1t will be remembered that the strap
was produced in court by the defense
some time ago and Miss Maud Lamont
was asked if it was not the strap in
Oh, he~ cie Ct OT 1n6 tn
carry her books While Miss Lamont
was not positive she did not think the
strap ever belonged to her sister. AttOr-
ney Dickinson asked that the strap be
admitted as an exhibit. District Attorney
Barnes objected and the court withheld
the ruling on the question until tonor-
row morning.
Had Seen Her Picture.
a long disquisition from Charles c.
Clark, travelling salesman who resides
in this city. but is now in Boston. was
read. The defense expected to prove by
Clark that he had seen Miss Lamont or
the afternoon of April g. accompanied
by a man other than Durrant. Clark
said that he could not positively fix the
date and only thought the girl he Sa
was Mss Lamont from the fact that
she resembled a picture of Blanche La
mont which he saw in newspaper few
days later.
An attempt was made to discredit th5
testimony of w. J. Phillips, who said ht
! saw OulTdIU enter GdWHDTOheT OQQeu-
helms shop on April u. Phillips was re.
called and asked about the character OF
a hotel that he had formerly conducted
! at Victoria, B. c., but the question failet
to show that he was ever engaged in any
business that was not respectable
Attorney Deuprey was not well enough
to appear in court this morning. 1t i.
expected that he will be able to resume
work in two or three days. He is still {
very sick man and although his physician
. reports that the attorney is on the roat
/ TO recovery, 1t is very doubtful if ht
viii be strong enough to leave his bee
during the coming week, let alone appear
III court. The symptoms of paralysi:
which were so manifest when Mr.. Deu
. prey first taken i'll, have not lef
him. Notwithstanding the skillfuI treat
ment and careful nursing he has receiv
ed.
1t is understood that in the event Mr.
Deuprey is not sufficiently strong to come
to court when all of the evidence is IN
District Attorney Barnes will consent t
: a continuance until such time as Dur
rants lawyer should be able to DreSen
, his argument to the jury.
Il am drawing instructions in the case
said General Dickinson, and that is al
I am doing. Yes, think the case fo
the defense may close in one day, Ger
rainly in two. OF course cannot as We
tell what there will be in sur-rebuttaI
but do not believe there will be a grea
deal. The field has been pretty we'll win
moved, you know, and there cannot b.
much more 10 come"
Durrants lawyer still clings to the the
cry that the story told by Mrs. CAROLYN
Leak is not genuine one; that it i
manufactured testimony, and DR.. Gibson
is responsible for it's production. Tn
Mrs. Leak and DR.. Gibson in this alIege
conspiracy. Mrs. Henry and Mrs. Lea
have been subpoenaed and when put ol
: the. stand will be questioned on the sub