Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1899-04-23

CANTON. O.. April 22s-The jury has
heard all of the evidence for and against
Mrs. Anna E. George, on trial for the mur
der of George d. SaXton. The last testi-
mony was given at 2:SS this afternoon.
when the state closed in rebuttal. The
defense offered no sub-rebuttal. ~.
At that hour court adjourned until Mon
day morning at 10 o'clock, when arguments
in the case will begin. These arguments,
it is anticipated, will occupy all Of Mon
day and Tuesdays sessions and possibly
extend into Wednesday mornings session.
They will be followed by the charge of
the judge and the case will probably be
with the jury some time Wednesday after
noon.
The court will mot limit the arguments,
it is now understood. but an agreement
will probably be reached by the attorneys
at the Monday morning opening as to what
time will be occupied
The court put a very close limit on the
evidence in rebuttal. Most of the proffered
evidence was in regard to Mrs. Georges
conduct in regard to men other than Sax
ton. Among this was an affidavit she sign
ed while in South Dakota. declaring that
her separation from her former husband
was not due to Saxton's solicitation, but be-
cause of the former husbands cruelty; also
writing from the same place at about the
same time to a Canton business man other
than SaXton in which she sought, accord
ing to the language of the letters, ap-
pointments with him on her return to Can
ton, before meeting Saxton. There were
also a number Of witnesses on hand to tes-
tify in regard to troubles between the ac-
cused and her former husband and to al
legged improper relations with other men,
but all of this was barred under the rule
laid down by the court.
The sensational features of the trial have
been the appearance as witnesses for the
defense of the son of the divorced husband
of the defendant. Although the latter had
secured damages from Saxton as well as
divorce with Saxton as correspondent,
he testified strongly in ravor OF his former
wife. stating that they had always lived
happily until they met SaXton. Neither
| Mrs. George nor Mrs. Althouse was on the
stand. Mrs. Althouse remained in hiding
and without her. attorneys for the defense
| rested their case on the aIibi established
by the testimony of Mrs. Klinger.
by the state to testify as to distances be-
tween points named in testimony for de-
fense. 1t was especially sought to show
that the accused might have left the scene
| of the tragedy after the shooting, and
| reached Florence Ringers home at the
h9Tr mayed Nssi by ths WITNESS recalled
nrs- Nettie hCAiiiSter Was Tecdiieu "
| tell of Mrs. Georges relations toward
| other men in 1886, when the accused pre-
! tended to be preparing for her marriage to
| Saxton. Excluded on objection of the de-
| fense. -.
| Mrs. Griffin, now of Wheeling. who, with
| her husband, a photographer, lived in the
| Saxton block in 1887, when Mrs George and
her husband lived there, was called to tes-
| tify In regard to quarrels between husband
and wife and Mrs. George's relations to
| other men. This was also barred.
Two letters. identified as having been
| signed by Mrs. George while in South
| Dakota, were offered and excluded,s Real
| Estate Agent ]. G. Stanton, being called
| to testify to their receipt in Canton. MI.
| Stanton said he could not identify the let
| tiers and that he did not know whether or
| ten in 1892
Testimony of Attorney ]. ]. Hawk to the
effect that he had noticed Florence B.
| Klingler and Ira Howenstine, the alibi wit
nesses, living together was excluded.
The court reversed the decision of the
morning about tracing Mrs. George in the
| afternoon and allowed the witnesses to To-
| cate her at the supper table at the time
| Mrs. Lindeman swore she was at her (Mrs.
| Lindeman's) house.
| These witnesses were 8. A. Kirk, pro-
prietor, and Miss Mauger and Mrs. Hug,
mattresses at the Star restaurant, at the
| time, who swore positively that Mrs.
| George was in the restaurant at 4:40 or
4:45 o'clock the afternoon preceding Sax
| toms death and that she remained there
until after a few minutes after 5. This
concluded the testimony In rehuttal and
the defense offered none in sub-rebuttaI.
Monday, when arguments will be re-
sumpQ.