The Portland daily press., 1896-01-25

no action in connection with it. No re-
traction was ever published in the Ex-
press. Mr.. Noble took exceptions to
the Judges ruling against the question
as to whether witness ever took any steps
to ascertain the truth of the article.
DIRECT RESUMED.
Witness had read an article in the Ex-
press, published ON July End, giving an
account of the SWEET trial.
Mr.. Coombs offered copy of the paper
containing that account as evidence.
Mr.. Noble objected on the ground that
he didn't see how they could put IN their
own papers account to bolster up their
case. The judge excluded it.
Mr. Coombs offered as evidence COPY
of the search and seizure complaint
against Michael Toomy, Coyle's tenant.
the complainants being ex-Deputy
Sheriff Goold, and Chase. MIR. Coombs
asked that it be admitted that the direc-
tors of the corporation denied that they
had any malice against Plummer. This
was to avoid putting them on the stand.
Mr.. Noble admitted it.
CHARLES S. sWETT.
AT the beginning of the afternoon ses-
sions Mr.. Coolnbs called Charles S.
SWEET, proprietorof the Durant house in
"a, to the witness stand. Mr.. Coombs
offered as evidence copy of the war
rent issued against SWEET by Plummer.
Mr. Noble objected and then took ex-
captions to the judges admission. Mr..
Coombs also offered copy Of the NUM-
cipal court record showing that SWEET
was tried and discharged for liquor sell
that SWEET was trital for keeping nuis-
ance and found not guilty.
Witness testified that he had lived in
Portland fifteen years.
The first time he ever saw PluInmer to
know him was in April, 1911. He saw
him on June Goth. 1854, at the Durant
house Plummer and Sterling came into
the Office and began looking about.
Plummer said he was looking for
rOnmed i'll No. II. He told him man
named Bowker. Plummer showed the
bottle OF whlskey and wanted to know
what it was doing in No. H. Witness
said he didn't know.
They went into Bowker's room togeth-
er. Witness asked Bowker fl he claimed
tbs, whiskey as his and Bowkar said yes
Pfuinmer ordered witness to come
down to the court the next morning.
The next morning witness went to
Plummer's office in company with Mr..
Coombs, but heard nothing that was said
between CooinEs and PIummer. That
was Monday. The next Saturday witness
SAW Piummer in Coombss office.
Coombs asked Plummer If he was at lib
erty to tell SWEET what Plumrner had
said. Piummer gavo him liberty and
Coombs told SWEET that Plnmmer said he
had two witnesses who would swear that
they bought beer at the Dufant house.
Ii witness would go down! and pay S1C0
and costs that would be the end of it,
but If Hummer was forced to show his
hand he would bring every action he
could against SWEET
Coombs said that il two men swore
that they bought beer and SWEET swore
he hadn't sold any, that would make
SWEET perjurer. SWEET declared thai If
no had to go to prison for it, no would
MT plead guilty to selling baer when he
hadn't sold it,. A
Witness did not sac Plulnmer againtill
the morning of the trial before the trial
Plummer sWOre out u warrant. in wit
ness presence, against him for nuis-
ance.
Witness then testified as to the proceed
in2s of the trial and Bartett's perjury.
WITNESS uiu hnt near Hummer interrupt
Bartlett when he was giving false tasti-
mony. Witness testified as to the wit
nesses for his defense. His whole case
was put in before he knew, that BARTLETT
bad committed perjury. Witness reIat-u
tao crcS examination eff Hummer by
Coombs which revealed the perjury Of
Bartlett Piummer hesithted about an
swerlng the questions aud aetell very ner-
vous. He whispered to the Judge aut!
Judge Gould said TO Mr.. Coonlhs: 'ttMr.
pluTmer tells me that you arc breaking
confidence that took place at your office -
Coombs Seplied that he was rot, and il
he was he deemed it his dirty, as q mem
Der of the tar to show ur - lar.
Plummer declared that 1oomls knew
that SWEET had sold the liqunr frat Wa
IN the jug SWEET had testified to that
himself at the trial.