The times., 1898-11-01

The trial of Frank Foxwef, who is
charged with larceny, in Criminal Court
No. 2, is attracting much attention from
the fact that as in the trial of John
Price, who was convicted in Criminal
Court No. last week, the chief point to
be settled to the satisfaction of the Ju y
is the identity of the accused. In the lat
ter instance the proof as to the identity
of Price was very conflicting, while with
reference to Foxwell, it is very strong,
he being positively identified by several
witnesses. who state there is not the
slightest doubt in their minds that the
prisoner is the right man.
Unlike the Price case, however. in this
the accused testified in his own defense.
that he was not in Washington upon the
day the robbery was committed, and also
brings two other witnesses from New
York, who corroborate his statement as
to his being in that city on the day and
hour at which it is said that the COM
planning witness, Abraham Samaha, says
he was robbed.
Foxwell is accused of robbing Samaha
of $500 worth of diamonds at his store.
No. 1911 f Street, on the 9Th day OF jan
uary last, under the assumed name of
"Dr. Charles Davis of No. 1910 Fifteenth
Street.
According to the statement of Assist
ant District Attorney Laskey, made to
the jury, the Job by which the defend-
ant got possession of the jewelry was as
clear cut as the diamonds themselves.
Samaha, when he took the stand, testi-
fled that Foxweli came to his place OF
business, 1914 F. Street, on the 5tn day Of
January last, and looked over SOME jew
elry. and when leaving said he would .e-
turn the next day If he could not do bet
ter elsewhere. Next day he returned and
stated that he would purchase the dia-
monds, a solitaire ring valued at $loJ, ear
rings for SO and breastpin for $40, and
asked that they should be sent to his res
idence, No. 1910 Fifteenth Street Tor IN
spectiou by his wife He gave his name
as DIR. Charles Davis" Before leaving
samaha's 5 store he took small box from
/ his nocket into which he asked the jew
I eler to put the diamonds and then got II
/ hack from him to write his address upon
! II As FoxwelI is said to have stated TO
/ Samaha that he left $500 with his Vile
/ Samaha had no hesitancy in taking Inc
/ iewelry to the place designated.
/ on arriving there, however, he found
/ that DR.. Charles Davis did in TACT reside
| there, but that neither he nor Mrs. pa-
/ Wis had ordered any diamonds. Samaha
! then suspected something wrong and
/ onsned the box handed him by FoXwell,
sIIpposed to contain the diamonds anu 10
his surprise found it empty
II Is stated by Samaha that the boA
| given him by FoXwell into wn'ch 10 p'ace
! the iewelry was an ordinary stlali ooioii5
! naste board box such as would be used
| bv a phvsician for the purpose of carry
/ inr, meu,cine Ii Is also his belief ihat
/ Foxwell changed boxes on him instead OF
! returning tie one containing the diamonds
/ and handed him an empty box similar
] In apoearance to the one ilrSt given MIN
and into which he put the jewels.
The defense claimed that the charge
! against Foxwell was the result of a cast
/ ~ mistaken y Foxwell himself
! took the witness stand and testified tha
on the day in question, January g. he wa
in New York.
This statement was corroborated by MS
brother-in-law and sister who reside il
New York. Ihey testlHeu thdI lheS W.
and still are not on friendly terms witt
the defendant, but nevertheless on th'
/ day when the robbery was committed
| and at that very hour Foxwell was a
| their home In New York City. They re
membered the date, they said, because i
was the day on which Foxwelfs fathe
left for Europe, and they all went dow;
TO the steamer to see him aboard tn
ship. The arguments in the case will b
concluded this morning. and the cas-
given TO the jury for consideration.