The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-01-25
LUETGERT UNDER FIRE
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE BIG
SAUSAGE MAKER BEGUN.
His Memory Treacherous, Especially
of the Alleged Murder.

CHICAGO, Jan. 24.-Auolph l.. Luetgerts
history of the circumstances surrounding
the disappearance of his wife, Louisa last
May was resumed on the witness stand to-
day. Luetgert explained how the stairway
door leading to the basement had been
blocked. This, it is alleged, excited the
suspicious of Bialk the old Waterman who,
when he returned with the Hunyadi water
for which he had been sent, found that he
could not enter the door and made use of
the elevator door. Exactly as William
Charles told the story, Luetgert said the
boxes had been moved about to give the
dog chance at rats which infested that
part of the basement, used as a storage
room for odds and ends
You had no intention of blocking the
door against entrance by any person." the
witness was asked.
None whatever; the door was seldom
used"
Luetgert to better explain, held a plan of
the factory before the jurors and eucidated
his statements by pointing out certain spots
with pencil. Mr.. Harmon asked a few
questions about tallow and meat in answer
ing which Luetgert declared his attention
to the fact that the children's savings bank
had been broken open was called by either
Mary Siemmering or one of his little sons.
Now" asked the lawyer, will you tell
me how you provided Tor your wife during
the year prior to May ~"
oh, when she wanted money l gave it to
her or she took it from my pocket smil-
lnsly answered the prisoner. Shortly be-
fore May l, just when do not recollect.
LI;19etgert continued, '.she took 500 She knew
a Know VINO had 1t, and it was all right"
Did you kiss Mary Siemmering often?,
plandly inquired the interrogation, while
Luetgert sat up straight In his chair and
the spectators looked Intensely pleased.
NO, no, no, did not" came the en-
pnatlc answer, which made the crowd tit-
kiss" ""'ou "
States Attorney Charles S. Deneen began
the representation of Adolph L. Luet-
CERT at D. m. to-day. Mr.. Deneen brushed
aside the long recital of the defendant $
birth, parentage, twin brother, boyhood and
rise in life, and went to the heart of the
matter, piltng question upon question re-
garding the habits and actions of Mr. Luet-
CERT during the twelve hours following S:45
O'Clock on Saturday evening May /, 1897
10 every question designed to fix the time
When anything was done or how long ii
took to do it the same answer was returned
that he would not attempt 10 fix the time
lie could not say whether he was in the sa-
loon one minute or two hours, and was
equally in tho dark regarding the time 1t
tooK 10 turn the steam on and to regulate it.
The most material advantage gained by
the state was the wide difference in the
descriptions of the appearance of the vat
on Sunday morning given by Luetgert and
Mr.. Charles. Mr.. Charles said the vat con-
tanned tallow, unassimilated grease I've and
some soap. Luetgert maintained it was all
Soapy substance, and that the only diff
ference between the top and the bottom was
that the former was darker colored and
slightly more fluid. Fully dozen questions
were put and repeated with the design of
forcing the witness to tell what the soapy
substance looked like. He realized the i'm
portance OF the point, and obstinately re-
peated his answer that it was just "soapy
substance
The cross examination has only fcgun.
The direct testimony was for the greater
part of far less interest than on the former
days. Mr.: Luetgert delivered his expected
roast of the police, and completed the task
of denying discriminating evidence of vari-
GUS state witnesses. The last important
feature was his statement that his wedding
ring contained no initials when he gave il
to Mrs. Luetgert twenty years ago this
month. He said he never had seen the rings
which are in evidence in this trial until
shown them in court.