The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-12-30
GROAMS' CASE STRONGER.
Defense Trying to Fasten the Murder
Burns.

Special Dispatch to the Post-Intelligencer.
TACOMA, Dec. e9.-ln the Creams muir
der trial II became apparent today that
attorneys for the defense intend making
complete denial Of the charge. and 10
attempt to show that some one other than
Creams committed the deed. The prosecu-
ton had put on several witnesses, and 1t
was at the afternoon session that John
Burns. one OF the chief witnesses for the
state. was called. II was in the cross-ex-
animation OF Burns that the defense
tipped its hand" and as predicted in the
Post-Intelligencer, fits course will be an
audacious and sensational one.
Burns is the occupant OF the shack in
which the crime was committed. and on
direct testimony told how. rather against
his WILL he had allowed Creams and the
woman to remain there on the night 81
the killing, he, himself, having gone 70
Creams cabin for the night. While tr-
norant and easily misled as TO questions
Burns stood the attack of attorneys on
the cross-examination fairly well. but did
not escape unframed. He had told how
he had left the cabin about o'clock on
the evening of the crime and had not
returned until the next morning. when
the dead body of the Indian woman was
found on the bed. After making the wit
ness repeat this statement so as to leave
no doubt of his meaning, counsel caused
wild sensation by asking:
Now, Is IL not true that you went back
TO the cabin at about I o'clock in the
morning and tried 10 pull the woman ont
OF the bed. over the body Of Creams, who
Law on the outside. and while both were
asleep. awaking Creams, and that you and
Creams then struggled until you were
forced out OF the cabin?"
The witness absolutely denied this. as
he did other discriminating statements OF
a similar nature, going to show bad blood
between him and Creams, and jealousy
on his part on account OF the Indian
woman. The nature OF these questions.
put in an insinuating form by the defense.
leads 10 the belief that the defense VIII he
a fiatfooted denial OF the crime and an
effort made 70 show that the man most
likely 20 want TO be revenged on Creams
and the woman. came to the cabin while
the two were asleep and cut both .heir
threats.
II was expected that attorneys for the
defense would follow IN the question
quoted hv asking whether the witness ala
not return later ana wreak his revenge
upon the sleeping pair. but the attorneys
evidently thought better az the matter.
and are holding of 10 spring the details
of their defense in their opening state
ment tomorrow. Burns testimony was
not IS strong rs had been expected and
mas fHh@e put niue 10 STOW intent 70
murder on Grosns' part. or I'm fact any
material facts. As vet little has been
brought ont 20 connect Creams with the
killing. and there are no ey~-wtnesses.
the task % the defense does not appear az
hopeless as was anticipated at first.
For the first time since the trial began.
Creams today grew interested and exhir,-
'tei signs OF u. II was when Burns was
pu. on the stand that Creams st-aichtened
Up in his chair, and from Burns first
statement 70 his last Creams eyed the wit
ness IKE a hawk. He seldom removed his
gaze from Burns face. and when he did IL
was but for a second. Tire trfsl Is now
packing the court room with vixitors and
this afternoon reopie waited in the CORR
dor FOR an opportunity 10 crowd their way
inside and secure standing room. II ~ ex-
pecied the prosecution Will rest ITS case
during the session tomorrow morning.