The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-10-07
"Boo. GANG WITNESSES.
No Ones Blood Ran Cold When the
TerrOrs Appeared.

Special to the indianapolis Journal
MARTINSVILLE Ind, Oct. 6.-The chief
interest of the morning session of the trial
centered in the appearance as witnesses of
members of the notorious boo" gang. No
involuntary shudder passed through the
audience nor did mothers clasp their inno-
cent little children to their breasts in terror
as these men in succession followed each
other on the stand. In open court they ap-
.peared as harmless as lambs although
their faces might not be taken for the type
found at North Side pink teas. 1t was
shown that several of them are now or have
been railroad brakemen. Joseph Keefe is a
wiry young man with much of the new
brakeman's swagSer about him, while his
features wear an amiable expression He
is not credited with being an unpleasant
character, has no police record and is
spoken of as a capable man by his employ
ers. His brother "Boney" is not so pre-
possessing, though there are few earmarks
of the vicious man about him. Dan Kinney
looks the type of brakeman Ferriter, how
ever, cannot have as much said for him.
He would be looked on with suspicion any
where 1t is the belief among some of the
people attending the trial that the police
have credited to the Boo gang many of
the honors which Ferriter alone should bear
A. M. Bain's statement for the defense at
the opening session of the trial in the morn
ing followed the outline presented in the
Journal. His exposition OF the law as it
pertains to the theories of premeditation,
malice and self-defense was checked by the
court on one OCCASION the young attorney
devoting too much attention to argument
instead Of conhning himself to a mere state
L
place, Ware had no right TO arrest Ferriter.
His version of the conversation between the
policeman and Ferriter just prior to the
scrimmage between the two differed ma
terially from that offered by the prosecu-
ton. He said the state would prove that
when Ferriter approached with the can of
beer the policeman asked, "What have you
got there?" anC not What have you got
on you?'' The defense lays stress on this
point that the patrolmans 5 inquiry was di-
rected to the contents of the can and not
to any weapon the young man might have
concealed. Ferriter replied, according TO the
defense, Its my beer, l paid for it, Ac-
cording to the same source the beer was
spilled on the policeman accidentally as
F'erriter was drawing 1T back from the po-
liceman who was making an effort to seize
the can. Mr.. Balm also promised to show
to the jury the brutal treatment the prisoner
had received at the hands OF the oiflcer;
The other points made have beea detailed
in the Journal. The statement was not a
very strong one.
FIRST OF THE GANG.
One of Ferriter's companions the night of
the murder, Joseph Keefe, was the first wit
ness for the defense. Mr. Keefe approached
the stand with some difidence. He is a
Big Four brakeman living at No. 43 Harri-
son street. AT one time he was employed
for three or four months at ship building in
Newport News, Va, and at another time
was engaged in tobacco stripping at Mum
Gle Ferriter he has known nearly all his
life In the alley, where the orgy was on
before the murder of Ware. were the two
keefe boys, Ferriter, Callahan, Kinney and
Joseph inland. The boys had emptied one
can of beer before the Ferriter-Niland
''scrap" While territer and inland were
sparrlng, the latter accidentally struck the
former a sharp blow on the mouth. Fer
ritter chased inland a short distance. A
minute or two after Nilands return, Fer
ritter went after more beer. When Ware
came up, he asked the members of the
gang what they were doing. He announced
that they would have to diSperse. keefe
asked Ware if he had been sent for. ana
he replied in the affirmative The witness,
his brother and Kinney went south and Cal
lahan and inland turned into Georgia
street. The witness saw Ware jerk Fer
ritter when that young man returned with
the beer The beer was spilled on both the
officer and Ferriter, as the ollcer pulled
the man toward him. The officer imme-
diately struck Ferriter, although Ferriter
was making no demonstration against the
policeman. according to the witness. Fer
ritter fell to the ground The witness and
his brother started away, going south TO
Bates alley and from thence east TO Noble
street.
ON cross examination the witness said his
brother Frank nickname was '8oney."
He told Mr. Witsie that he had known
Ferriter ever since I've been old enough
TO run around" The prosecutor drew from
him the admission that there We're lapses
Of several years in which he had not seen
the defendant. Mr. Whsle had no oppor-
tunity under the rules to show by the wit
ness that Ferriter had been in the peni-
tertiary. The prosecutor wished TO show
the discrepancy between Keefe S testimony
before the grand jury and that on the stand
and MIR. Griiiths objected to the introduc-
ton of the grand jury notes, as Mr.. Wiltsie
Continued ON Fourth Page.)