The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-03-19
HIS TESTIMONY CONCLUDED
PROSECUTION THINKS BRANDFs
HAS BEEN CoRNERED.
The Trunk With Which He Accounts
for the Noises Could Not Have
Been Drawn Down the
Stairway.
Oakland Office San Francisco can.

sl8 Broadway, March is.
william A Braudes. charged with the
murder OF his little daughter. has been
evidently cornered by the shrewd prose-
cution. He was again on the witness
stand to-day in his own behalf and made
eXtravagant use Of his forgetfulness and
refused 10 answer vital and material
questions on REORGANIZATION.
Both he and the woman who is accused
with him have testified that the noises
which neighbors had heard on the night
lillian is alleged 10 have been terribly
beaten were caused not by blows and the
hurting Of Ljllan's body against the
walls but were made while Brandes was
drawing the girls trunk downstairs into
the basement. Both have declared that
this trunk is longer and wider than the
steuOgrapher's desk in front Of them.
Now the prosecution proposes 10 show
that the trunk could not have been taken
down The stairs, as il IS wider than the
hallway.
Braudes to-day admitted that he was =
swearing and cursing man. but he de-
MED that ne swOre at Lillian on this oc-
casiOn. I was swearing at Mrs. Brandes
and the boy at that time" said witness.
Deputy District Attorney Melvin here
confused Brandes.
Why. I thought you had already told
Us that Mrs. BrandeS was in the parlOr
with Mrs Godfrey" said Melvin, inquir-
ingIy. Witness assented, and replied:
Yes. but I mean I was curstng TO NY
Brandes denied thai he asked HarschelI
Mcdonald. q Berkeley newspaper re-
porter. 10 be easy on MN IN MS WIILe-
up In fact ne didnf remember 1tzif.t Nc, Nc
Donald. In brief, Brandes denied every
statement that the prosecution has shown
him 10 have made subsequent 10 the al
Eon,tnGiur. ne said that he never sus-
pecced Lillian had taken the missing SO;
Whom did You suspect! inquired
Tine reriv proved a sumner.
u suspected my wife, said Brandes.
II was very reckless about laying money
down and she had taken II before
ATTORNEY Melvin here again thought he
saw an opportunity TO clear up the re
la1i0ns existing between the two accused
murderers- He asked:
Witness cringed in his chair and looked
al his attorneys, one OF "hom' 64"S e.
5This IS misconduct upon the part of
the District Attorney said Sawyer, for
he knows we'll what the answer would De
and mis- man is on trial for murder"
\ long argument followed and Judge
Hal again ADVISED witness that if the
answer 10 the last question should tend
10 degrade him he need not respond,
whereupon Brandes, regaintng his COM
posure, said ne did not wish TO answer 1t
and" continued Brandes, now recall
ing his slip OF the tongue. II wish 70 cor
rect what I said a. few moments ago.
said my WIFE I meant 10 say Mrs.
Brandes.'
Brandes was next shown the photo
graphs of his dead daughter and declared
thew did not resemble her, as there were
more bruises depicted than he had seen
on her face.
isn't it a fact that the mark. on the
forehead was made when you struck your
daughter with a piece Of hose?" asked
Mr.. Melvin sharply.
Witness quickly responded negatively
and denied that there had been a piece
OF hose about the house at the time
Isn't that piece Of hose now in the
possession of your attorneys?" tnQutrtng-
p " continued Melvin Witness again did
not know"
This practically ended Brandes' trying
ordeal and the trial was continued until
next Tuesday, at which time, the defense
announces, il viii introduce but one or
two more witnesses. The prosecution will
thereafter put in its rebUttal-