The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-03-30
ATTEMPT TO PROVE AN AL|B|
JAMES TRUE WAS AT HOME
PLAYING CARDS.
Defendant and His Wife On the Stand
In the Train Robbery Case-Tracks
and Shoes.

day morning before Judge Marshall,
and Maurice O'Hornett, stepson of
James True, the defendant, was further
examined by the prosecution. His tes-
timony pertained mostly to the loca-
ton of the house as regards the rooms
and the plan of the same.
The purpose of this testimony regard
ing the plan of the house was for the
purpose of showing that True could not
have left without the other inmates
knowing it. and also for the purpose of
d!screditing testimony of witnesses of
the prosecution, who testified in the
former trial that the house was COM
pletely dark at the time the card game
was alleged TO be going on there.
The defense expect 10 show that the
windows of the room used could not be
ssen from the street.
MRS. TRUE.
Mrs. James True was the next wit
ness She claimed that True was home
all the night of oct. Is, 1896, and that
Mr. and Mrs. Wadman were in, and
the four played cards until a late hour.
She also entered into minute de-
scription Of the premises, using map
prepared by the defense.
The house, by the way, has been torn
down, quite recently, and two of those
who were said to be present the night
of the card game, David jenkins and
Frank Wadman, are dead.
On cross examination Mrs. True said
she frequently rode from Ogden to
Salt Lake and back on a pass secured
frcm Mr. Young. on the occasion just
prior to the robbery, she came up with
out either ticket or pass. a gentleman
connected with the railroad company
allowed her to ride free. She was dis
inclined to tell his name. and when the
prosecution persisted, she appealed to
the judge, who excused her from an
swering.
Mrs. True said the first she heard of
the robbery was on the morning after,
when her father, David Jenkins, told
her that some friend SOlicitouS for the
welfare Of Maurice, her son, had in
QCired if he was at home that night.
The person making the inquiry had told
of the robbery, and had expressed
fear that the boy had been in bad COM
pany and been led TO it.
She and her father had disagreed be-
cause the old gentleman had refused
TO disclose the name of this solicitous
person.
The first time she heard of her hus-
band being accused was little while
prior To his arrest. when she went into
her fathers room and found him in con-
vefsation with Mr.. Pearce. Mr.. Water
bury and Mr.. Daniels. OF the three she
only knew Mr.. Pearce at that time.
Mr.. Waterbury had abruptly asked
her; What do you know about this
Uintah train robbery" and she had re-
piled, Nothing
Mr. Waterbury had said: II have a
warrant for the arrest of your husband
and son. and / have authority to de-
mand all correspondence had from your
husband" She had gone into the next
room. Mr.. Waterbury had followed
her, and they conversed in there about
the robbery and about her husband s
whereab bouts at the time of the robbery,
and IT that time.
In the afternoon Mrs Martin Cullen
was called, and gave some emphatic
testimony why she considered l.. I.
Cullens testimony as unreliable. George
Mole gave similar testimony as to Cul-
lens lack of truth and Veracity-
Maurice Fretwell, a youth from Uin-
tab. told of his finding the registered
mail matter and some foreign letters
a day or two after the robbery, in a
field about 80 yards south of the
Uintah depot. The registered letters
had been looted and the stamps We're
found in a barn some distance from
the place where the letters We're found.
He took the letters TO theraiiroad agent
at Uintah and protected one of the
tracks seen near the place by piling
stones around il. This track he after
ward showed to Adam Paul, detective
from Salt Lake.
The young man thought the track
was Of a No. I or s overshoe, with a
somewhat rounding toe. Witness iden-
titled pair of gloves picked up near
the letters.
a rather rigid REORGANIZATION was
imposed by Mr.. Maginnis and Mr.. Judd
to test the boys judgment of shoes and
their sizes. Judge Judd offered his
brogan in evidence, and the boy thought
Adam Paul corroborated Fretwell. ex-
cept that he thought the shoes We're
souare-tOed. He measured the track,
and thought it d little larger than his
own shoe. which was heavy No. 5.
Paul was also used to d.scredit Nc
Evoy's testimony. McEvoy having told
him that he thought Emmerson was
the train robber when Emmerson was
under arrest.
Mrs. Eva Gale. whose house was near
the place of the robbery, and who is
cousin of Mcfarland, testified that Me-
Farland came to her house about ten
minutes after an explosion which
walked witness. She thou ght he was eX-
cited.
]. W. Christie. court reporter. testi-
fed as to Netherlands testimony at the
former trial. his evidence showing
some discrepancies between McFar-
lands statements at the two trials, al
Il0uEn they were AlDA Vel Alcl-
Mr.. Christie next read the testimony
given by Mr.. jenkins. who has died
since the former trial. The testimony
went to strengthen the alibi theory;
corroboratiag the testimony OF other
witnesses on that point.
Pat Purdy testified on the alibi the
ory but his evidence was Of little i'm
portance.
Engineer Roland, recalled by the de- |
tense testified as 10 the grades between |
Ogden and Morgan, and the schedule /
Of the trains. the purpose being to /
sho.y that True could not have gone
out and met the train and boarded it I
while il w5s in motion.
Attorney Marsh for the defense testi- {
fed regarding the plans of the Jenkins
house. where True is alleged TO have !
spent the night, and strengthened the !
alibi theory. On cross-eXamination he
denied having been employed in the /
case until quite awhile after True's ar
rest.
Branch Creamery at Statewide.
I1Ia,eo,,t