The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-06-24

than you had hoped, and that you
thought she made the jury believe VIVA,
she said was true7"
mo. I did not say any such thing.
I know that. because ! was not at the
Office hat day. after Eva Smith testi-
ned. 1 did say the next day to Mr..
Noon that / believed Eva Smith lied In
her testimony about the razor
Charles Andreiux was put on the
stand inc Mr.. Nolan asked him IL ne
remembered having a conversation
with Booth at noon on the day n
Eva Smith testified in the Shafer case.
Yes. sir. / did" was the reply.
What did he say In that conversa-
tion?"
He came back to the Office in very
good spirits. and said Eva Smith had
lied like hell. even better than he
thought she would. and that he really
thought she made the jury believe It,"
Andrieux said he had often talked to
Booth about the case and Booth had told
him that they had a hard case and IL
they got Shafer clear they would do the
biggest thing ever done in the state.
on cross-examination by Mr.. S~callon.
the witness said Booth came into the
office laughing and he asked him how
they were getting along and Booth re-
piled with the statement about Eva
Smiths testimony.
You say he was In good spirits; that
Is your opinion, Is IL not?"
Il was well acquainted with Booth
and the way he strutted about the Of
flee showed that he was in good spirits"
Your opinion was that he was In
good spirits because Eva Smith had
lled?'
mo: / know he was In good spirits.
He showed it."
c. p. Connolly, chief deputy county
attorney. was the next witness and gave
some important testimony. He told
about the proceedings in court on Oct.
l6. when the Shafer case came up for
setting. and the talk about a desire to
tax the deposition of Ed Laney. The
witness was asked concerning the claim
OF Booth that he at that time had in
his possession a letter from Ed Laney
and that he offered the letter to the
court and Mr.. Connolly, but that they
did not wish to see IL.
Il have no recollections OF such a let
ter ever having been rendered In open
court" said Mr.. Connolly. II lave rea-
sons to believe that no such occurrence
ever took place. because even then
there had been certain developments
that led me to believe that no such testi-
mony could be produced"
Mr.. Connolly said he would not say
that Mr.. Win was not present In court
at the time. but he did not believe he
was. Anyway Mr.. Wines mad no such
statement, as he claims. that he would
pay half the expense. out of his own
picket. for bringing Laney back to
Butte.
Unless my mind Is absolutely blank"
said Mr.. Connolly, no such offer was
ever made by him. i believed at the
time that he proposed testimony of
Laney was a fake. and I would have
been most Eager to snap up any such
offer. for l wanted to see the alleged
witness. There was never any question
that the county was ready and willing
to pay all the expenses of bringing him
here"
The witness said that IL Booth had
offered him any letter from Laney he
would have taken IT and read it. be-
cause he wanted to learn all about the
man he could. He had stated in court
that he had Investigated the matter of
mileage, and hat he could get at least
500 for the witness to defray his ex-
penses. II was then that Booth said
he had a letter from the man stating
that he was going to San Francisco,
and could not come TO Butte. Later
he Informed Mr.. Connolly again that
they could not get Laney to Butte. and
there were no further efforts made in
that direction. Mr.. Connolly said that
after a commission was ordered issued
by Judge Clancy to George Runnells,"
office, Wines not being with him, and
said he would fix the matter up at
once. and he dictated a long letter 10
Runnells. AMI also dictated to Mr.. John
son a stipulation empowering the no.
tary to appoint another man to take
the deposition II he could not attend
to It. After he had dictated the stip-
MIA tim he went awav and said no
would be back In half an hour to sign
II, but he did not return. MI. Con-
molly searched for him about town. but
could not find him. and he held the stip-
ulation N interrogatories until late
in the evening. They had to go off
that day in order to get the deposition
back in time for the trial. Mr.. Con
molly said he thought Booth simply
wanted the stipulation for the purpose
Of binding the prosecution, so. being
unable to find Booth. he signed II him
self n sent II on to Seattle. In the
meantime he had also learned that the
Seattle notary's right name was ]. r.
Ronald. instead OF George Runnells,
and he substituted that name in the
commission. A few days later Yin
and Booth came into the Office very
muc excited. and said their man could
not find "Runnells." and Mr.. Connolly
apologized to them for neglecting to
inform them that that was not the no
tary's right name. and that he had in
serted the proper name In the COM
mission.
Mr.. Connolly testified relative to the
afiidavits made by J. w. Bacher. Eva
Smith. AL Ford snd Ed Rose. Roses
affidavit was made a long time prior
to the others. Mr.. Connolly said he
was anxious to investigate the perjury
matter at that time, but other circum-
stances interfered. He was asked how
he came to investigate Rose. and he
replied that during the Shafer trial he
a insisted, In his address to the jury,
that the Laney deposition was faxed,
and after the trial he obtained some
Information from a juror upon which
he acted, and Rose was sent for and
was questioned - to his knowledge OF
certain matters.
IT think I told Mr.. Rose" sal Mr..
Connolly. 'that We had Information
that Wines and Booth had procured a