The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1897-07-23

The mystery of the Mason tragedy at
Moundsville, was solved at the coroners
inquest yesterday morning. by thu con-
fession Of a eolored boy, James Edward
Jones. who is the perpetrator OF the
crime. Jones. who Is only thirteen
years of age, bears a bad reputation for
the reason that he has recently been
caught stealing, and nelghbors have
had their eyes on him constantly.
Tho motive for committing this crime
seems to have been on account OF the
murdered boy. Stanley. possessing in
formation OF him having stolen a horse
bride from his home about a month
ago. Jones, on the other hand, has al
way denied being implicated in the
stealing and he and Stanley have had
one or TWO quarrels over the matter.
Yesterday morning the jury placed
Jones on the stand for their first Wit
ness. and his story Is in substance as
follows:
on the day OF the murder he left home
in company with his father. to pick
blackberries. near their home. They
we're out all OF the forenoon and see
cured about two buckets OF berries, af-
Ter which they returned home for din
.ner. After they had partaken of the
meal, Jones says his father sent him to
town and he went back for more ber-
ries. He vas probably there q half
hour when he succeeded in filling his
bucket and again returned home. This.
he said, ended his labors in this line and
he proceeded to do his usual chores
about the house. after which he sat
down IN the yard and read a book. re-
naming there the remainder Of the az
ternoon.
on cross-examlnatlon he was asked
IL II was customary TO complete his
work that early In the afternoon and
he replied In the affirmative. He was
then asked II he had not spent a part
of the afternoon at the Mason home
stead. and he told the jury that he had
never been at that place during his life.
On cross-examination he was asked III
his mother had not frequently sent him
to Mrs. Mason 10 borrow different ar
ticles, and finally said that she had and
he had been at the place. He was then
asked why he told a lie about not being
there, and replied again that he was
not near the place. This was the first
place the prosecuting attorney got the
witness tangled up and Il ended IN the
boy breaking down and crying like a
baby. Being asked why he acted 10
this manner he said that he thought
that the people present thought he KILL
ed the boys and he didn't even touch
them.
The 10y confrssss.
II was easy to see that the boy knew
more than he was telling, so Mr.. Par
CONS accused him OF striking Stanley.
This he denied at first and after a rigid
cross-examlnatlon. he finally admitted
that ne struck him on the bare feet with
a willow switch. which he had brought
along with him. He said Stanley had
said that II he struck him he would split
his brains open with a hoe which he
had in his hand. Jones. when this
threat was made. took the hoe from
stanley and in the struggle he beat his
victim into lnsensiblllty. winding up
by taking the switch and lnshing his
body until It wa black and blue.
The wounds inflicted by the hoe were
enough 20 cause his death and he told
exactly the place where he hit him Oh
the head and nearly the extent OF the
wound. He next made for the younger
brother. who. no doubt. saw the first
tragedy and did his best to kill him
with two very sharp sticks or clubs,
The extent Of this ones injuries have
been told and his evidence was nothing
new.
All the weapons that were used In the
crime were placed before him and all
were fully Identified. His iirst impress
sion was 10 try to make the jury think
there was an old man In the case and
that he was near the houJe Mt the time,
However. by cross-examlnatlOn, he
could not alive anything definite and his
story was not believed. In fact the
how contrldlcted himself so many
times that It was only by a rigid exam.
lnatioB that the true facts OF the case
were secured from him. Many who
were present at the trial thought that
uerhaps Il was his father who was Will
him and that he was afraid to tell any
thing.
The prosecuting attorney then asked
him n he would tell all he knew II the
others would leave the room, and this
ne ala n little later. but his story was
the same and no evidence was given
that would lmplicate his father. The
guilt Of the hoy was now nearly an as
Eured fact. but the Jury Thought that
they would like 20 hear the evidence OF
his father, and he was next placed on
tbe stand. He told Of being u attet
the berries. but In addition 60 his son,
his grnnd-chlld, Sallie. was along, also.
They remained out oil morning and did
NOT get home until after I O'Clock, when
they ate their dinners. He remained at
the house until 4 o'clock, when he went
10 town. After his business was trans
acted. he returned home. He said he
was sure his boy was at home all after.
noon. hut admitted that he could have
been away on his arrival home, he
vaa asked where he found his son and
no said ne was picking berries and he
called to him TO come and 80 20 Rob
erts with him for some corn and the
boy obeyed. The story az the boy read
inc n book was denied by him for he
was not at the house.
Here Mr. Parsons took the witness In
hand and he Informed Mr.. Jones what
his boy had confessed to. The mnn
seemed surprised and replied that IN did
not think that the boy could say such
a thing, for he was sure he was at home
ali the time. He was next asked II hls
son was not accused If the crime and
N he ala not speak TO him on the sub.
feet He replied that he knew that In
was, but nv never said anything 80 his
boy.
The witness contradlcted himself on
some af the mluut questions asked, hui
ma evidence was obtained that could
conuecf him with being implicated In