New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-12-06

of the poison In the bottle.
The witness said he took away from the MAJ
no blood or other physical specimens 80
the condition Of Mrs Adams or cornish ne iv ,
no evidences of commissions or of bodily strussnns'
He gave Mrs Adams three hypodermic in1ee,'Pbr e
of whskey. He said that II Was nv and the last
injection OF whisky and admitted the ,h woman
must have been mistaken when ne Sa'u r The
died within seven minutes af'er ne e"''''' Wv
SURPRISE FOR THE DEFENCE
4, osQ o'clock DIT Hitchcock left the stand ana
Dr. Wendell Phillips was called lie was eNr Us,
and Frank c. Mclaughlin an empoye oi -
ar,cl stearns e. Co. of Detroit. Mich, was put on
~. ,ard This witness had not been heard OF be-
snro IN any of the proceedings. Mr. Weeks OBJ
ected 10 his introduction at TINS um ~ ~ dra Rad
oyerrYisG a al tbe me employ OF Frederick seans
eyer pv man - named A. A. Harpster He answered
IN the ibere about four or 1--WE years
AS soon as the name OF Harpster waa an tho
al, Thai the man mentioned was beyond the
Jurisdiction of this county and tnat svcn evaDt or
c u0n e The Court overruled the objection 2
the witness was shown letter ssn o f. giving
The exact date on which the letter was Tece,NiSSed
October 81 1855. Another was sh shown anu searns &
a. on Becember a. 1895 Both letters were Offered
in evidence and marked as exhibits "a, snsWers
70 The letters The answer was Yes 40 e o,ar
question asked Mi Weeks objected and was wa UVer
ruled ain,,onance Of II S Cornish The witness then
produced letter press copy 81 t cornsh nauring
ahout Harpster. Mr.. Mclaughlin swoiy , He ' 10
known Cornish for some time inns oo"'p'e''"e
PT Pros Weeks Objected TO being compelled 20 cross
examine this witness at the tlme' anu "
was excused until wanted
PLOT AGAINST HARPsTER-
He WAS followed by Rudolph Helles, who said he
lived at No S5 Beaeh-st Newark, n. j. ana was
employed by seidberg stefol d Co., and was for
merly employed as cashier at the KnickeroocKer
Athletic Club and worked alongside A. A. Harpster'
who was then clerk at the desk lie had alwa ai
Osborne held out to the witness letter. JUST alter
having asked the witness at whose dlctauohh ne ne
had written II: The witness SAID hoI nd,ha 3D.
Moneux" Molineux was at that time. OctOD !t
1898 a member of the Board OF Governors OF tH ne
New-Yor Athletic Club, and Heiies Went there 70
see him about getting the contract to furnish ' ne
to the club for firm OF provision Geaer o ny
which he employed. Heiles SAID ne kne" Cot
nish. and had talked with Molineu1 ABOUT A. a.
Harpster at the club. .., ....o
ton between Molneux and himself about Harpster:
MOneux he SAID wanted TO- Know S wheT nd Was n
structed by him to find out where Harpster had
R RfsR e@POhe St Soad be @
purpose OF getting Harpster discharged from the
Ss Baantne e'0 Brewing COMPANY Heiles then
wrote a letter to Frederick Stearns & Co., patent
% eaT %as hs signed IN ~ jacobs w
the reply came Heiles showed It to MolneuX ana
asked for a recommendation of Harpster, and the
witness sad there was no be da9 ~ Sa
niter a no. Wbo was TO sign it. any more than that
the defendant wanted certain information regard
ing Harpster and that the witness was TO get II lor
him.
THE LETTER is READ.
at was discovered that one Of the bogus Cornish
letters was sent to Frederick Stearns e. Co." said
Mr.. Osborne, land l use this to prove that there
were repeated efforts the part of the defendant
10 niure Harpster, because he was a friend or
Cornish"
The letter was then read Here it is;
New-York. October 10, 1898
Messrs stearns & Co. Detroit Mich.
Gentlemen; We are DESTROYS of employing one of
your former statesmen Mt A. HsTPeIer wnd ere
he will be compelled to handle cash, and he refers
us 10 you. We will consider il great favor Tor
you 10 reply al d" cfHIA A H. JACOBS & co.
p. s.-We will be glad 10 reciprocate at any Time
Heiles then testified that Molineux said to him
that Harpster was dirty loafer' and the same
kind of man as Cornish-a bad character in every
WAY. and not to be trusted. lie also said that
Mollneux had told him Cornish had circulated
damaging reports about him (MolinenH) 10 .o tne
effect that he kept I the witness said
hs cSSer @ at 3Rs Ahc Club
also Ga a ae S TP Board ne Of Of
the Knickerbocker Athletic Club to nave cornish
ID 6aS W6s s cb Himself Moneux told him
of certain things Cornish had said about BaIloW
Weeks and that he went 10 the Boa'd OF CIV
ernors also about that matter pul was "ii""'0 ~
get any satisfaction.
HEILEs DESTROYED THE REPLY.
Heiles said he had destroyed the letter he re-
ceived in answer to the sent by him TO Stearns
a. Co He did this about two months after the
death Of Mrs Adams. thinking there would then
be no trouble about this getting out lie had
learned by that time that Harpstcr had either eii
Balantines or been dismissed by mat nril, anu
I'm that case he had further need Tor the ietter
II was not the death OF Mrs. Adams, ne expiaiheI
/ in answer TO questions by Recorder CON ina I
caused him 10 destroy the letter but he adnitted
that II was destroyed because OF the arrest OF MOI
| neux IL was destroyed only week or TWO diei,
the defendant was arrested. Heiles was then asked
| nv MIR osborne If he read the newspapers during
! the course Of the inquest ana was answered. III
! "Is Il not fact that YOU then learned for the
first time asked Mr.. Osborne, that letter WITH
ten TO Frederick Stearns Co., and signed by the
/ ~ ,us Coiu.sn, mad been round ana lnat as soVI
a. ,ou READ mat In the newspaper accounts or the
Inquest YOU Immediately destroyed the letter YOU
! had received from the Stearns company In answer
! 10 the one you wrote them and signed Charles H.
| Jacobs x Cor
! Yes" answered the witness.
| lis il not fact that you destroyed that Iette'
| because you knew you were destroying clew?'
Eyes" Helles replied.
els II not also a fact that you knew when you
destroyed that letter that the man who had written
! the bogus Cornish letters TO Frederick Stearns q
| Co was this man accused OF the crme?
| Yes" again replied the witness.
| II then 4:35 o'clock, and an adjournment unit
1910 a. m to-day was announced
| JUDGMENT AGAINST KL0NDIKE CONCERN
Judgment for 1904 was obtained yesterday
against the National Kondike Mining and Trading