The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1896-11-19
THE STIMONY TAKEN YESTER-
DAY IN THE TWENTY-SIXTH
3 DISTRICT COURT.
A MOTION WAS MADE FOR A CONTINUANCE
Judge Brooks Very Promptly Set Down
on the Motion-The Matter of Juror
Excuses, Etc, Considered
and Passed Upon.
From SATURDAYS Daily.)

From Saturdays Daily.)
Yesterday morning, in the Twenty sixth
district court, His Honor Judge Brooks
presiding, the case of The State of Texas
VS.. Eugene Burt, for murder, was called
promptly at 10 o'clock, and thus was
opened this now famous trial. The court
room was crowded to the very doors,
many standing, and from present indica.
tons the trial will be attended with
much interest.
Yesterday morning the crowd began to
gather early, and by $3.50 o'clock the
court room was packed, many occupying
seats within the bar. There are in rhe
neighborhood of 800 witnesses in all
summoned in this case and from present
Indications, if all are given hearing in
the case, much time will be consumed.
All these witnesses and the spectators
by the score were on hand early yester-
day morning and listened with breathless
interest to the various witnesses who
were examined. one aafter the other.
District Attorney Albert Burleson, as
sisted by County Attorney Calhoun and
Attorney Todd. took their seats on the
right of the attorneys table promptly at
the opening hour, and Attorney Geo.
Walton, as the defendants attorney,
seated himself on the left, while Attor-
ney w. NJ. Walton, the other attorney for
the defense. took up his position near
the witness box.
As Judge Brooks took his seat at 10
o'clock Eugene Burt, the defendant
under the escort of three deputies, came
into the court room through the cast
window, near the jury box, and took his
seat behind his attorney, Geo. Walton,
while Jailer Hughes seated himself i'm
mediately in his rear.
Burt was dressed in a dark suit of
clothes, had his collar, cuffs and necktie
carefully adjusted, and neither looked to
the right or left, but eyed the witnesses
carefully. He has cropped slight
moustache since his confinement and yes-
terday he had about a days growth of
beard on his face. He looked very
well yesterday, considering his long con-
tnement, nothing out of the ordinary to
be noticed, save in the matter of the
lrawn expression that he had on his
fOuntenance, as though ne was nerVeu
Tor some ordeal.
When all was ready, Judge Brooks
read the title of the case, and the attor-
ney for the prosecution asked that in con
sidering the case the motion for
change of venue should have precedence
and be heard first.
Attorney Geo. Walton, for the defense,
then read the petitions for the change OF
venue, as follows:
The State of Texas VS.. Eugene Burt. In
the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District
Court of Travis County, Texas.
And now comes Eugene Burt, the de.
endant in the above entitled cause, and
states upon oath that there exists III
Travis county. Texas, so great preJu-
dice against him that he can not obtain
n fair and impartial trial of this cause
in said county; wherefore, he asks lne
court to change the venue of this cause
to some county that is free from this ina
other objections. ,,,nr
tSigned) EUGENE BUM.
The affidavit of the applicants of Burt's
reads as follows:
We do solemnly swear that we are
residents of Travis county, Texas, me
county where the prosecution OF saiu
case was instituted; that we are IN
formed of the contents OF the hppllca
ton for change of venue, this DAY nieu
by the defendant, Eugene Burt, IN tne
above entitled and numbered cause a!u
we are cognizant. of the matters thelt ;1t
stated and that there does, IN fact, exist
in said Travis county, Texas, so great
prejudice against him, the said Eugene
Burt. defendant, that he can not OBTAIN
an IMPARTIAL trial of said cause IN said
county.
w. G. EYRES.
JAS. NJ. HALL,
WALTER B. CORWlN.
District Attorney Burleson, in rebuttal,
read the replication Of The State, by her
attorney, as follows:
Case No. 11014 State of IeXas VS.:
Eugene Burt. In the District Court OF
Travis County, Texas, October lerm'
To said court comes now The State, by
her district attorney, A. ); Burles3n, aH ~,
resisting the application TINS uay nitu y.
defendant, Eugene Burt, 1or . cn ansa
of venue of the above entitled cause;
wonid renresent and show unto said
court: al ororv
,yarment made in the affidavit Of said
Bu u and the affidavit made by ". II;
stacy " 6; EyEes' t Jas n NJ, su nai aG of
IA annl;cotion for change of venue.
Second-The State would show unto
Tho conrt that the above named tour per.
sons who sign the supporting ns aftda aD5
are citizens of the city OF A1 cbaroc cn
are engaged in business OF char I1.
Of said city and that they are not ac-
0ua int With the sentiments of the peo-
ME of Travis county. .ho
piGT h ~ the State would show unto the
oo,,r niiu With the means of knowledge OF
f tTe four M' persons filing said supporting
edge on the part of said Burt Is G and
s ey Of aG' Aas and includes and IN so5
limited limit to only few persons IN liors sarf
city, and that they are not con'efS"H'