Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1896-05-09

had taken the two women down TO the
lane on the evening after the murder,
and made them to walk along the lane
through the sand, and the tracks
were measured
After thoroughly questioning the
witnesses, counsel for the defence OBJ
iected to the admission of the testimo-
ny. Captains Wise and Guigon urged
that it should be excluded. Vehe-
ment speeches were made on either
side, the earnestness of counsel prov
ing that they regarded the point as a
vital one.
BROTHER GREGORY FOUND THEM.
When they had concluded, the wit
ness explained to the Court that the
tracks had been found by Mr.. w. w.
Pettus and his father, Mr.. ID &. Greg
ory, and a measure made by the latter,
and given to the witnes, who meHsur-
ed the tracks. He had put the stick
into the pocket of a coat in his room,
and had not seen it since
The Judge took the admission Of the
testimony under consideration, and
court adjourned until s 80 p. m.
THE DEFENCE wITH-DRAws THE QUEs-
TIoN
The night session Of the court began
at 8 80 o'clock, with Mr.. ID. j. Gregory
still upon the stand. and that the pros
ecution stated that they would for the
present withdraw the question as to
whether anybody's feet had been
measured to find whether they cor
responded with the tracks found IN the
lane by Gregory and Mr.. Pettus.
| The witness was examined in extern
/ so as to the tracks, and explained that
1 the reason only left-foot tracks had
been found, was because the right feet
| of the parties who entered had been
upon hard ground, the left foot being
placed on sandy soil, cut up by stock
STOOD ASIDE.
After a severe cross-examination
the witness was told to stand aside
with the understanding that ne would
be recalled later.
| Mr.. ]. +. Eubank then took the stanC
and testified that he went down th'
lane leapiRg to the old gate place ear.
lily Saturday morning, and had founC
two bare-footed tracks going out o
the dFaw-bars and two coming il mex
to the left-hand post going out.
WHAT BROTHER EUBANK FOUND.
, Mr.. Eubank said that he had examin
ed all along the lane, and at the corne
{ of the yard fence he found where som
zone had gotten over the railing, AM
! the print of their feet was upon tn
plank. He also found at this point
< piece OF cloth about R1 inch souar
n4<orn out OF a garment
II At this point, before the witness tol'
anything more about this torn piece
/ the jury were sent from the room
| Mr.. Eubank then continued, statin
that there was a sharp splinter npo
? the fence point where this party go
a over, which had caught her dress an
torn out square piece of blue cloth.
THE CLOTH IN EVIDENCE.
: Mr.. Eubank said that he did nc
: know where this piece of cloth wa
e that it had been handed around to se'
r eral persons TO look at, and had nj
II been returned The defence streI
e uously objected to the admission
this testimony, claiming that it WI
secondary evidence, the piece OF clol
r not having been produced in court.
Before arguing the question Mr.. FL
bank was questioned further, and,
order to test his knowledge of colo
he was shown a piece of cloth, whi'
/ he promptly pronounced blue
IL DIDN'T KNOW THE COLOR.
he cit happens to be green" said Ca
IN tain Guigon, amid suppressed laug
y ter around the courtroom. Jud
III Crute said that this question havi
been raised he thought the witne
IL ought to have a chance to look at
cloth by daylight. 1t was agre
therefore, that the question should
). passed upon tomorrow, and Mr.. +
bank left the stand.
wv WORE NO SHOES.
NJ Mr.. H. G. Fore was then put on I
% stand, and asked if he knew whetl
- Ellen Gale and Pokey Barnes had
~ shoes the day Mrs. Pollard was m
4 dered. He replied that they W.
n both bare-footed. Mr.. Fore then
"S the stand. The prosecution annoul
o. ed that they would recall h
cd later, and court adjourned until 9
II O'Clock tomorrow morning.