The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-02-12

on the Night OF the Explosion.
In the Olchefski trial, as has become
apparent to those Mho have followed
II, the strongest circumstance against
the accused is the lnutilated condition
OF his pallor furniture. The common
wealth contends that he cut open the
Mchair bottoms and poured kerosene
into the oakum padding that it might
the more easily ignite and the more
rapidly burn. The defense denies this
and gives out the inference that the
enemies of OlChefski who were so dem
onstrative on the following day. cut the
furniture in their spite and anger af-
ter it had been carried out and possi-
bly, poured the kerosene upon it to
bring about the suspicious which cul-
minated in Olchefski'3 prosecution.
This being the case, imagine the dis
appointment of defendants counsel,
yesterday, when they called one
Charles Ancovtch to testify that the
furniture was whole and unmutlated
when It .was carried from the house
and he testified to just the very oppo-
Site--that il was cut and torn and that
it smelled strongly of kerosene.
The defense rested at this iuncture
and then Nj. Jones sprung a little sur
prise party. which, coming as it did
Immediately after the telling blow
which AncovitCh inflicted, must have
had an effect not at all to Olchefski's S
liking. What Mr.. Jones had up his
sleeve was evidence to the effect that
Olchefsk was in his store after IL
o'clock and that he WAS acting in n
suspicious manner. all of which would
contradict his statement that he was
not in or about his store after o'clock
on the evening in question, when he
closed up for the night.
CATHERINE SMITHS STORY.
The witness was Catherine Smith.
On the night Of the explosion SHE was
in attendance uron her sick mother
who lives on Pttston avenue, two doors
from, the OlChe fski building. Return
ing home after II o'clock she passed
the Olch5fski store and was surprised
to see 0lchefski emerge from the front
door in his shirt sleeves. her surprise
being occasioned by the lateness of the
hour and the fact that there was no
light in the store. He came out on
the porch, she says, looked quickly up
and down the street and re-enterinS
locked the door behind him. She was
positive it was Olchefski and that the
hour was after II o'clock.
When court resumed yesterday morn
ing the defense called to the stand C..
Fl. Chittenden, K. G. Brooks and Ed
ward Moses as experts in the use and
effects Of dynamite and all three agreed
that if the explosion had been caused
by Il large quantity of dynamite, as
the commonwealth contends, the sides
of the building would have been splint-
cred instead of being blown out in large
sections and the foundation walls
would not have been left standing. 1t
is more likely, according to their opin-
ion, that the explosion was caused by
gas.
Olchefsli. the defendant, was then
put on the stand He told in detail
the story of his experiences on the
night Of the explosion, which he has
clung to so tenaciously all along, and
explained away-or attempted to
all the discriminating circumstances
brought out by the prosecution.
He went to bed about II o'clock, he
says, and the next thing he remembers
he was awakened by the explosion.
He jumped out of bed and ran out
through the chldren's room. AS he
opened the door he was struck by some
thing, he doesn't know what, and that
Us all he knew until he found himself
sitting in front of the blacksmith shop.
DENIED THE CRIME
lie denied the crime in general:
swore he did not cut the chairs OF
pour kerosene about the house; denied
that he told Max Phillips or anyone
else that he kept dynamite in the store
and avcrred that he did not know Max
Phillips and never to his knowledge
saw any dynamite.
lie admitted having carried a bag to
the barn about 10 O'Clock as stated by
Mrs. Klein. but contended that it con-
tanned feed and that he was in the
custom of carrying feed at night from
the store to the barn.
His explanation of how the store
goods discovered secreted in the barn
come to be there was quite moved As
to the half dozen bundles of clothes
line he stated that he intended to &c
fishing at Laceyville but didn't want
his wife to know anything about it
as she was opposed to his going, SO he
sncaked the clothes line out of the
store and hid it in the barn, where he
might get it without arousing her sus-
picion when Ne was ready TO go on his
fishing trip.
He proposed using it as an outline
ne said. AS to the whisk broOms he
explained that he took them to a GUS
toner the day previous to the fire
hut they did not suit the customer
and he brought them back in his wag-
on. He neglected to take them back to
the store.
Mrs Helena Olchefski, his wife, next
took the stand, and in relation TO the
fifteen bottles of perfumery found in
the barn made the statement that while
the fire was in progress she gathered
up the perfumery from her bureau and
carried it to the barn for safekeeping
realizing that it would likely be stolen
if it was not secreted some place.
She also denied that she was COM
pletely dressed even to side combs in
her hair when she emerged from her
burning dwelling. All she had on be-
sides her night clothing was petit
coat and shawl, SHE says.
UNDER CROSS-EXAMINATION.
On cross examination Mr.. Jones ask.
ed her if IL was true that while she
and her former husband. Joseph Rude
wick, kept hotel near Freeland, that
the building was destroyed by fire
consequent upon an explosion. She
emrhatically denied this and averred
that the building is yet standing an6
that her brother-in-law conducts no.
tel In IT.
Harry Rudewick, Mrs. Olchefski's IL.
year-old son, corroborated his mother
and step-father about the experience