The record-union., 1895-09-17
BLANCHE LAMON4'S MURDER
The Trial of Durrant Resumed Be-
fore Judge Murphy.
MOST DAMAGING EVIDENCE YET
INTRODUCED
Man Who Took the Murdered Girl
From the Normal School. and Swear
They Saw Him AIicht With Her
Near the Emmanuel Church.

San FRANCISCO, Sept. 16.-Ihe evI-
dence against Durrant to-day was the
most damaging yet introduced. There
were but three witnesses on the stand,
but they identified him as the man who
took the girl from the Powell-street Nor
NAL School. and saw him alight from a
car with her near the church. Cross
examination did not shake them.
The first of the witnesses was Miss
May Lanigan, one OF the three girls who
left the school with Miss Lamont, and a
lew minutes later saw her on q car going
in the direction of the church. The Wit
ness positively identified the man who
was with Miss Lamont as Durrant.
Mrs. Mary Nogel, who lives opposite the
schooihouse. identified Durrant as the
man she had seen walking outside before
the class to which Miss Lamont belonged
was dismissed that afternoon. She paid
particular attention to him, as she had
considerable money in the house, aud his
suspicious actions led her to believe that
he was burglar. She saw him meet the
young lady, and watched them get on the
car together.
Mrs. NogePs testimony cOrroborated
that OF Miss Edwards, another of the
schoolgirl witnesses, in every particu-
lar. She identified Durrant first by
newspaper portrait, and afterwards when
she saw him in court in the early part of
the trial. To-day, when asked to point
him out, she walked TO within few feet
of Durrant. and said impressiyeIy: That
is the man."
Durrant was unmoved during this
scene, but tho weight of the testimony in
troduced to-day as a whole told on his
splendid nerve.
The last witness of the day was Mrs.
Elizabeth l.. Crosset. She was II years
of age, but of apparently unimpaired
faculties. Her statement on the stand
was that she left her home in the north
ern part OF the city to dine with her
granddaughter in the Mission, whore the
Emmanuel Church is located. 1t was
$40 when she LETT home, and some twenty
minutes later she boarded car, by trans
1er, on which she says Durrant was riding
with young lady she did not know.
Durrant was outside on the dummy, and
Mrs. Crosset was on seat opposite on
the inside. 1t was seven blocks from the
point where she got on to where Durrant
and the young lady allghted, and en- route
Mrs. Crosset had ample opportunity to
take notice of Durrant. This, she saws,
she did, beyond any possibility of mis-
take. She observed them when they
aiSuleu, anu tuOuB0t Inc GlrIs nat was
somew hat lighter than that shown in
court. Her description of the girl who
was with DurraDt was meager. So far as
it went it tailed well with that of Miss
Lamont.
on crosse examination Durrant's attor-
neys attacked the old lady on her mental
ity, and subjected her TO a across-examina-
ton which was so vigorousthat the court
interposed to protect the witness. Her
memory was tested, and il was found to
be SO good that she could readily give a
list OF homeopathic remedies which she
from time TO time had taken. She said
she had known Durrant about four years.
and had seen him as much as five times a
month at the home of her son. Durrant
was very intimate with her grandson.
The defense claims that Mrs. Crosset
saw Durrant infrequently, and that she
did not know him well enough to speak
to him when she met him.
Mrs. Crosset is sure of her dates, as on
the day she met Durrant she had an ap-
pointment which fixed it on her mind.
and on the day following she left the city
on a six weeks visit.
The prosecution expects to finish it's di-
rect case this week.