Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-12-21
COMES TO A CLOSE
Evidence Concluded in Trial of Frank
W. Funk.
SUBMISSION OF PRAYERS BY COUNSEL
Arguments in the Case Begun This
Afternoon.
TESTIMONY HEARD TO-DAY


In 4 court room derSely crowded the ht-
s-vpipg If tbe end II the trial Of Frank W.
.-, .r,., ,.,,-r,s,,s, ,,-ha,, the. de-
i'iN W." '''. . - ,f+
Tense after the eNdil4ll''l 4VH % ''i5 "
ness announced that t rested IFS case Inc
government then begun the introduction of
evidence in rebuttaI It had previously been
stated by the court that the trial should
b. concluded. if possible, By tomorrow
evening.
The cross-examination If the defendant
nas IT progress until after = o'clock yes
terday afternoon, an adjournment then
being taken until this morning II was not
noted that any material fact was developed
H. rb- c-,ss-exsruinatlon Of Funk that the
, 1T. i . L. $50
"-L'ilSs Hei not ''1''i- 90 90 oe
Inc witness "l' was tsti!tH IA's morning.
ny cEe defense made statements which
v-sr. regarded 10 be Of most decided i'm
-, "a ~ +-i-,,.,,,- NO. hove ..,
- -. - - -, - -. ~,
- ., ~ -, u t,.tl,.rI "a h.
~ = ~ ~ - oa7s gle,ili
= = ,--f,.,,,;.I -, "a = ,,,,;r,srs.
~ -. p.'a. 'i 80 " - ' i,
u ~ ~ "a : . lilg i.t u ~, ~
- $3.50. ~ ~, 80, ~
- co--T-s-. lfI S'I',.SH IN i-''''lf o1 ~
80, I'M = l.s,s :, eu ~
Hosat Eg<plt4tS, anu Tor zen ye3rS ItS psen
$50 - -, 500 $3.50 %
.l'uFs yesterday :" Ut f'eIrVni trH'iIeu'
ne M"S 'i.sJ'se.s: III S'iitlI5 W., IT, 20
~t.u " HCttae!itr' ~ tA<tiiltlAls tHt spec
nleh taken %! Ut ocHaeHtF from the al
80 otl'u s'alii on thE a5"uS-rS %orn pS
I uAH me -''d OF June lN9o- Ut SchdeHtr.
- WI Dc ftihetnDefeh' stated that ne folhd
.! AN OF nerve issue IN Ihe specimen lie
olI NOT swear pos!tiFeiy th@t the blood
SStIs examined were those Of human blood
What He Discovered
y-,tb sr,,,.,,,s5. n, 1,.,,,.,,, ,,,.,o-,s hot
win eH'li''iSIS LIZ i'ei!reild ueciaFeN that
- "a -. L..e - ,--1
lsup, a ali which ,rraars ~ ~. -
rara If trs IL, S. 81, -, -,
finn, any ,.,,-ri,,,, ~ r5,a ~
Al-1,,,ss1I IL us mo-, ,,.-,,f,f,,, D.. -, -,i
feJ IN ,,7,-r ,.,,,,,,s.r 5- a-,,b-r+.,- e.. ~,
statement that during Jhs eZam;1arian of
the specimen Yesterday DR.. Schaffer ad-
n1.Jtei 10 Or. Bshrend that the microscope
used BY The latter vas decidedly superior
instrument To that used by himself when
h. made the examination OF the specimen
on which his testimony was based.
The defense. as stated. closed here. and
'he government began its rebuttaI by re-
calling Sophie Brown. The defense object
81 - certain OF the statements Of the wit
q NO. pe.I'e teou'tal' -tltGrheF Baker
flr,. the iIIry- r1s,,sI,, fIr - - III ~
Mrs Brown denied the truth Of certain
statements made on the stand by Mrs.
80 anu ,,l lis2 lhLt The mad ever been in
Sba aIso t1id ~ IT, I,a,SS - I uii h
was dressed The ora ~ -, go =, ~
size described II. was different from Tho
manner referred to by Funk
B DigEius captain OF me watch ~ Tho
State. War and NAVY Department b,iiI,,tr,s,.
Mrs. Mary Suit and Margaret ProolSs p,.r'e
also called TO verify the staternep4s ~
Sophie Brown as 10 her manner Of dress
the afternoon Of the murder On cross
examination these witnesses failed 10 de-
scribe how other parties were clothed the
same day
Ue,pf. R..d.-r,,o,-
neeaiied'
N7Nl Jennie Beederbect, 10 whom Funk
vas married in Philadelphia August ~
1895. was recalled b,, the e,o,.e-,,,oaD, .rha
-. -. - So g ilIiis"'- me
"t'i-s79 "@S asAed II ulih had assaulted
ief on a certain occasion. and the defense
objected on the ground that such te$tf-
uony was not admissible In urging tho
objection counsel for the ,lafarsa "a -
throughout tho trial the govsrT,cs-,t go
been working for rre,t This 49, 81, IL
reply from the United Sta.aS e,ttnr tct .t me