The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1896-12-01
DINNBEA'S ORDEAL
Witnesses Say His Wifs's eodics
Was Under ths Kitchen.
II Was SATURATED WITH u,.,
Dinnecn Admits the Dress Mate
terial Was in His House. Try
ing to Prove an Alib..

Deputy Attorney General Peter t. Coop
erin Oyer and Terminer Court yesterday
afternoon opened the States case of al.
legged arson against Dennis Dinneen, the
middle'aged lrishmar, in whose case a
/ jury was drawn at tho IN orning session.
Mr.. Cooper explained to the Jury that he
would prove for the state that on the
morning OF October 3, OF the present year,
ID Q left is home aud won't to the
holse of Anton Koch, near Hockessin,
winch he owned, saturated an old dress OF
his wife's with coal oil and after setting
fire to it, stuffed it under tho frame
kitchen of the house; that Dinneen had
beon seen by Koch running from the
building; tha5 he had not been at his
home until late on the morning the fire
was discovered, and that his wife had so
Informed the police, that the dress which
caused the fire had been made by Mrs.
Bolton for Mrs. Dnneen, and that Din.
necn himself had offered Mr.. Bolton q
road cart II he would burn the place SO
that he could recover Sll0O Insurance. in
the Mill Creek Company.
All these allegations wore listened to
attentively by the prisoner, which If proven
will send him to the gallows.
Then Mr.. Cooper, began the examina-
tion Of witnesses by calling Anton Koch,
the tenant of the house, who swore to
being awakened by his wife on the morn
ing of October B. because of the fire. Tho
witness hurriedly dressed and going out to
extingulsh the i1ames saw man, whom
he believed was Dinneen, making his cs.
cape. The witness told of the fire in
detail. Mr.. Cooper inquired If the barn
was burned the same night but Mr.. Hayes
objected contending that tho question
bore on II second count in the Indictment.
The court held that il the state could
prove that the barn and woodshed fires
wero caused by the blaze which had its
origin under the kitchen, the testimony
was admirable This Mr.. Cooper said he
would prove, where upon the question was
allowed. kochs reply was that the barn
was burned the same night and that the
blaze broke out short time after he left
the house The fire in the barn originated
from the exterior The witness knew
nothing of the dress found under the
kitchen, saying his woman" found it,
Under crosS-eXamination Koch in his
broken language, told Mr.. Hayes he was
not positive Dinneen was the man he saw
running from tie house. Mr. Cooper OBJ.
jected to Mr.. Hayes asking the witness
whether or not he had, before the commit
ting magistrate. said "now that we have
put out the fire let's lock the doors for
fear the tramps will come back and kill
us" Mr.. Cooper held thnt the attorney
Oh the other side would attempt to dis
the changing in his testimony of single
term, which he could not see was mater
ial. The court believed Mr. Hayes had
the privilege, whereupon Koch answered
thai he had made tho statement.
MIR. Cooper having lost his point asked
the witness if he knew the difference be-.
tween tramp and person, which term
the stnte preferred to use, Koch replying
that he did and explaining that the form,
er meant man, who walked around"
The definition :caused some amusement.
Mrs. Annie Koch, wife of Anton, told
of being awakened about 2l0 o'clock on
the morningOf October 3, by the shine
on the barn" She ''wakoG up her man
and children" and going olt OF the house
began the work of extinsuishing the fire.
OIL both the kitchen and wood-shed, They
had the fire under control, when another
blaze was discovered in the barn, The
blaze was in the centre of the building
and in the hay. This fact Mr. Cooper
thought conclusive proof that the fire had
been started by some one.
The burned dress goods was handed to
Mrs Koch. She said she had found it un-
der the kitchen and had also found pat
tern of the same bodice under the wood
shed. 1t was saturated with petroleum.
Mr.. Cooper clinched the testimony by
drawing from tho witness the statement
that she had seen the bodice on Mrs. Din
neen during the month of May in this city.
Annie, the daughter of Mr.. and Mrs
Koch, had also seen tho bodice worn by
Mrs. Dnneen.
Mrs, Elizabeth Bolton, who resided near
Hockessin on the third day Of November,
was handed the burned bodice by Mr..
Cooper, and identified it as a garment she
had made for Mrs Dinneen sometime be.
tween May and August of 1896 She saw
a piece of the garment the morning of the
fire and at the time recognized the mnto.
rial asthat made into the bodice for Mrs
Dinncen.
On crosS-examination Mrs Bolton told
Mr.. Hayes there might bo other women
who sewed like her; made bodice like
the one in question and that there was
material like It.
H. B. Bolton told of having q conversa-
tion with Dinneen in September of 1894
during which ths prisoner told him he had
paid $500 for the property and as it had
deprecated 800 ho intended burning the
building believing that he could be
squared after Obtaining the insurance. In
the following December Dinneen had
offered the witness road cart if he could
burn the buildings on the property.
When M. Hayes took Mr.. Bolton in
hand, he asked il he knew jeremiah
Cronin. Bottoms reply was in the affirm
ative, whereuron Mr. Hayes asked if he
had not, in December of 1894, said to
Cronin ~ Dinneen don't give her more
money I'll burn it sooner or later I'll
burn it any way. Mr.. Bottoms reply was
a positive negative, and CAUSED the states
attorney to laugh at what they believed a
feeble attempt to discredit Mr.. Bottoms
testimony.
On tho morning Of November police
officer jeremiah Hurley saw DinGeen
enter his Church street home at 42o
u .At, hnI Eaa
by Dinneens wife before, who said her
husband had not been homo, which fact
she attributed to drink. Mr.. Hurley said
he could not say whether or not Dinneen
had been drinking This statement caused
Mr.. Hayes to refer to the witness testi-
mony at the preliminary hearing, which
was to theeaeeS that tho officer had said
Dinneen had been drinking. The officer
explained the variance In his testimony by
saying he might have said that Dinneen
had been drinking.
Police officer Louis Rhonholz testified
to accompanying police sergeant Evans to
the Dinneen home on the afternoon of Oc- |
tober 3 and finding him asleep. The Off.
cers did not inform the man why he was |
wanted until Mrs. Dlnneen asked him |
why he burned the Koch house and barn.
Dinneen made no denial. Sergeant Evans |
corroborated the testimony.
State detective Walter Witsl testified
concerning shingles found on the Dnncen
property, which were offered in evidence
together with the burned bodice
Thomas J. H. Baldwin, secretary of the
Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, of
Mil Creek hundred was called asked il
he knew Dinnon and if he had insurance
on the Hockessin property in the COMPANY.
Before Mr.. Baldwin answered MIR. Hayes
objected because Of iniLumsabihty, he b.
lieved as thele is u statue covering the
charge Of burning the property to deiraud
an Insurance Company Mr.. Cooper
pleaded with tho court that there was no
other way Of proving a motive to the
crime than by tnat undertaken, where.
upon the court informed him that tho
bench belieyed tse uuesron relevant and
therefore allowed it to Le answered sThe
insurance amounted TO Sl.O5D, and was
iiyidcd rs follows on dwelling $50; on
contents $3.50; on barn $500; contents $3.50;
1n slaughter house sizes; on wood.Louse
rs Tho insurance policy was offered and
in evidence.
This eMdat the states tc jtinOny.
STORY OF THE DEFENSE.
Mr.. Hayes in opening the defense said
lc would prove that Dinnuon was not at
Ilockessin the night Of the fro that he
yus in this City bCtWPpn q and 1 n'cl0ct; |