The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1897-04-13


have anything TO d0'Wlth the IRE, He
~ i1isfrupfed 81 ar. sommerville,
who asked for proof for this statement.
Mr. Hiileg didn't give any proot' and
said the court could let the statement
M or not He then took up the hour
when the tife was discovered = O'Clock
N lie morning, an hour h which tsa-
ton was IN. Pittsburgh. The prosecution
did not Rttemptito show that ne was n
Wheeling later than WEDNESDAY y
noon. The prosecution had Drought
forth all the testimony; the DEFENSE nal
brought none. because Il didn't tnink
g necessary.
Mr. Hilles concluded his argument
very eloquehtly, and took the grounds
that the prosecution had failed 20 make
DOT a primh facle case, therefore, ne
asked for the Dismissal Of his client
Mr.. Nesbitt followed Mr., Hilles. He
briefly sketched Eaton's coming to
wheeling. and renting the Turner
building from Mr.. Johnson, for distri-
butinE agency OF manufacturers goods.
Eaton was willing to leave the property
at ten days notice. He went 70 various
insurance companies, telling them nc
was TO have q vast amount OF goods.
piling falsAlo0d upon Ealseho0d IN
speaking OF goods IN his store, and the
$4,000 worth Of goods eventually TO
be placed in hiE store. To one insuf-
ance man he had said he would Keep
druggists supplies.
''Eiy paper. canes without fertules,
and busts of Columbus! Are theEe drug.
gIsts' supplles?" asked Mr.. Neshitt.
''Why did ne get empty boxes from
the Hub? Why did he discharge the COLI
ored man on Saturday, and on the next
week move the boxes up to the second
floor. and pile them around the wins
dows? Such proceedings, misstatements
Ia insurance companies. buying empty
boxes, were enough to show evil In
tent"
The fact OF Eaton being seen at the
stone bridge at about the same time as
another man saw him at the store, was
not varying testimony. rather torrob-
oratlYe, because q few minutes walk
would bring man from the bridge to
the store.
Mr.. IIoyce's Argument.
Mr.. Boyce concluded the case for the
defense. He began by saying that the
court had no jurisdiction in determln-
Ing the prisoners guilt or innocence. It's
only business was to :. determine the
probable cause OF the fire. and decide
whether there had been n sufficient ar
being held for further trial
The fire occurred February 20 Eaton
came back to Wheeling after the fire In
the sace of public criticism, yet the
present efficient chief Of police had not
arrested him, nor had the grand Jury
Indicted Eaton. His arrest remained
for private detective agency with the
prospect of a handsome reward.
AR. BOyce explained the ten days mo-
tIce In Eaton's lease, by saving that the
property was for sale. and that Eaton
agreed to this clause by requesting MF.
johnson to use his influence for reten-
tlon Of the store room in case It was
sold, Mr., Boyce went over the testt-
mony supporting the abb theory, and
disputed the evidence TO the contrary
given by Messrs. List, Rice, ChRrnock
and Grandson. CharnOck had testified
that In his Judgment Eaton was not the
man he saw the day of the fire. Rice
was unable to state how the man was
dressed, vet positively identified Eaton
as the man. With this conflicting tes-
timony before the court, Mr.. Boyce
claimed the alibi theory remained UNI
scathed. He claimed like contradictions
existed in the testimony regarding the
direction Eaton was said to be going in
across the bridge, or along the street IN
front OF the store,
would come down from Pittsburgh to
fire building stealthily, and then
crouch on a public bridge at the noon
hour, He attacked Grandison's testi-
mony In toto, and said 1t was absurd TO
suppose that Eaton trying TO get sew
erai thousands Of dollars OF insurance
would t0lSe strange colored man IN
his confidence. The colOred mans evil
dence was contradictory, ana ny eia-
gram was not authentic. Grandison's
statements In the direct examination,
confiicted with those he made in the
cross-examinatio
The insurance men, excepting Mr..
Morgan, had stated that Eaton haa
represented his goods as being worth
$4,000, hence Mr.. Boyce thought that
Mr.. Morgan was mistaken when he
placed the amount at $4,000 or $2O,0OO.
The evidence did not Justify holding his
client for the grand jury, said Mr.:
Boyce, and he trusted that dismissal
of the case would follow.
Mr.. sOmeryIlIe'S Review.
ar. sommervllle gave brief retro
spect OF the case. Everybody agreed
that the fire was OF incendiary origin.
The counsel for the defense did not even
ollude to the fire itself. No suggestion
had been made that the fire occurred
from spontaneous combustion: 1t is
agreed that some man applied the
torch. Abiding TO the grand jury being
in session shortly after the fire, and
not bringing an Indictment. Mr.. Som
mervilie said the prosecuting officers
told them that the time for the trial had
=-T--------s-s'--