The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-01-08

A BOLD DEFENSE
Strange Testimony Given
in a Nuisance Case.
The Defendant Claims to Have
Many Relatives.
Counsel in Aylsworth Case Talk Back.
Well Known witnesses.

and n jury this morning.
Sergeant George A. Clark testified that he
had seen several drunken men come out OF
the cottage house occupied by Mrs. Dolphin
and had heard much loud talk and other dis
reputable actions at the place. Mrs. Dolphin
had told him when he raided tho place thst
she had sold no liquor. and didn't see how she
could be arrested for keeping disorderly
house. The witness also testified that on
former occasion the defendant had said 20
him that she kept boarder. Sergeant Clark
also testified that he saw uapy cans OF beer
carried into the house Of a night.
on s-examination by Mr.. owen the
witness said that when the raid took place,
the defendant said the trouble was caused by
a former boarder.
Officer Charles E. Smith testified 10 about
the same things as the previous witnesses, ana
on cross examination stated he never followed
Minna Dolphin on the street. nor had he ever
spoken 10 her. He had heard Mrs. Dolphin's
home called dive.
Officers Kennedy, Mshoney and Lieutenant
Scott were other witnesses for the State
The latter. in reply 10 a question by Mr..
Owen. said he never supposed that there was
any liquor sold at the defendants home. and
never instructed any officer to try and got any
sales on her.
Mr.. Owen, at the conclusion OF the testi-
rnony for the State. asked that the jury be
instructed to bring in verdict for tho de-
fepdant, as tho State had failed to prove any
OF the charges In the Indictment
After brief consideration Of the argument
advanced, Judge Wilbur denied the motion,
because sonie testimony had been introduced
20 show the character OF certain persons who
frequented the house.
Mrs. Dolphin testified that she resided with
her two children, one ID years old and tho
other IL. at the of Goa Cranston street.
and that the only parties who visited her
were relatives She admitted sending out for
beer. and said that she and her two sisters
bad been known on the vaudeville stage
tho Vale sisters. In response TO question
from Attorney -3eneI al Dubois, she said she
had played at the old Theater Comique. She
also denied the evidence given by the officer
as to the kind of a house she kept. Minna
Dolphin substantiated her mothers testi-
mony. and said that police officer had fol.
lowed her from her work at the knight street
mill to her home, and this had led ner mother
10 remonstrate with the officer.
Berthena Dolphin. another daughter OF the
defendant, aged IL years. but very bright
midget. denied the stories told by the police.
number of other witnesses were also called
by the attorneys for the defendant.
LAWYERS TALK SHARPLY.
Miss Mary Salmon was called by counsel for
this executors OF the late Judge Aylsworth
and she testified as 20 the advice given by the
Judge to her father. Francis Salmon. and to
the mental condition of Judge Aylsworth
when her fathers will was executed in July
1892. The judge was one of the witnesses to
this will, and according to the testimony OF
this witness the judge was thsn in full pos
session of all his faculties.
The witness was cross-examinsd by Mr..
Aldrich, but nothing of material Importance
90 the case was obtained, counsel directed
his efforts TO shaking the statements previ-
ously made by the witness.
j. c. Conroy, plumber, testified that he
had done work for Judge Aylsworth in 1883,
1881 and lsQ2, and had had many conversations
with him about the work. and he found the
Judge had very keen ideas about what was
required to be done in order TO have the
chsnges made in property owned by him.
Arnold B. Chsce. one Of the directors of
che Westminster Bank, testified to The relations
existing between the bank and the Judge, and
that be saw nothing in 1892 to lead him TO be.
iieve that Judge Aylsworth was in an en-
feebled mental condition or that the Judge
was childish or peculiar in his conversation.
Judge Aylsworth had directed the affairs of
the bank.
The cross-examination was conducted by
Mr.. Brown, and was in regard TO various
transactions at the Westminster Bank, and the
sale OF certain Fall River stocks Ly the judge.
Some of the /. b. Hopkins notes had been dis
counted at lower rates In lso3 at tho request
Of Judge Aylswortb.
An interesting discussion arose during the
cross-examination of this witness. Mr.. Brown
told Mr. Chsce. while he was answering n
question, not 20 look at either Mr. Bassett or
MIR. Ripley.
This remark brought Mr.. Ripley TO his feet.
who pronounced the statement an Insulting
one.
Mr.. Chace denied that no had received any
intimation from either Mr.. Bassett or MIR.
Ridley as TO how he should answer when he
looked at them.
Mr.. Brown then said. "But IL is fact that
while the last % questions were being asked.
the witness has looked at the gentlemen re-
forred to-"
This brought Mr.. Ripley nga tn his feet,
and he rather warmly replied o the remarks
made by Mr. Brown
3afs Ai'ftSh Nhtn tOok the moor, and said
that there was charge tnat MIR. Ripley bad
made any sign 90 the witness.
Judge Rogers asked counsel what the mat
ter was referred 10 at all for " no charges
were made. and intimsted that Mr.. Cbace
had the right TO look at whoever no wanted
TO, and the matter was then dropped.
APPELLATE DIVISION.
In tho case OF the Warwick and Coventry
Water Works Company vs. Industrial Com
pahy ct si. n decree was entered this after.
noon dismissng the motions 90 limit the ac-
count 10 be taken on and sftor December &.
1892. and for receiver.
In the case Of William B. Posrce ct al vs.
Thomas Harris and wife 81 al. n decroe was
entered revoking the decree entered on July
III. lh,a. and lappoinfins -Cornalius- Il -kxseI-
land. Nicholas sheldon and William Il. Wood
commissioners 10 make partition.
bearing was also heard m tho csse OF
d. n