The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-12-13

uty Sheriff Wilson. of King county, who
testified that on the morning OF July
he saw Phillips in the Reception saloon
at about o'clock Phillips was just on
shift. Lyts and Esplin were there. Wit
ness was certain that they did not see
matters. Witness heard the conversa-
ton; was near one OF the boxes; they
were at the bar in the back end of the
saloon about fifteen feet distant. Did
not know how many were present IN the
barroom while the conversation was 60
ing on. Witness first saw the men that
morning as he passed by the front OF
the saloon by pushing the screen door
and peeking through. Witness went
from there to the Mirror saloon and stay
ed there a short time, then came back
past the Reception and into Clancy's
place, thence into the restaurant by the
back entrance to avoid being seen by
Lyts, Esplin and Phillips
The only persons witness saw In the
restaurant were Lyts and Phillips and q
young man working behind the counter.
The defendants were sitting at a table
in the center of the restaurant. Did not
see the proprietor while in the place. He
might have been there.
Wilson Cr0ss-Examined.
When asked by the defendants attor-
ney on cross examination II he had not
acted as detective In this case, witness
replied that he was trying to find wit
nesses who knew the facts in the case
and used the ordinary diligence of an
officer of the law. The conversation wit
ness heard between Lyts and Phillips was
in the nature OF a quarrel, because Phil
lips was not disposed to divide certain
money fairly. They were wrangiling over
II while they were in the restaurant.
After witness satisfied himself that Lyts
and Phillips were the parties he wanted
he Immediately notified Sheriff Van De
Vanter. Traced Phillips to the Pacific
house and found him in bed. Left him
in charge of the sheriff and went to the
prosecuting attorneys office and pro-
cured O. warrant. Took him to the mu-
nicipal court. This was about 10 o'clock.
After the preliminary examination went
with him down town. He was trying to
secure bail.
During the noon recess. ana Just prior
to the opening Of the afternoon session,
the attorneys got into q heated discussion
over the competency Of certain evidence,
and the court threatened to call the sher~
IN to quiet them II they did not cease
Quarreling.
Lyts was placed on the stand as a wit
ness for the state. When asked his name.
he refused to answer It. but finally an
swered When asked II he was not in q
Old not see Phillips take a roll of money
from the inside pocket Of Miller's vest.
witness refused to answer.
Ibid you not protest against Phillips
taking money from your friend?" was
asked. Witness refused to answer.
"Dsd you go to drug store and buy
chloral hydrate?" was asked. Witness re-
fused to answer.
Ibid you testify on the preliminary
trial against Thomas Phillips?" was
asked.
II was forced to by the prosecution
replied Lyts.
"Who forced your" Lyts refused to an
swer the question. The state rested Its
case.
After short tntermission defendants
attorney. Robert Hubert. opened the
case for Phillips, stating to the Jury that
what would be proved by his witnesses.
The first witness called was Phillip
Wren. of Aberdeen. bartender. He tes-
titled he was acquainted with Thomas
Phillips, was In the Reception saloon
about o'clock on the morning OF July
g. Phillips was there, with some men he
did not know. Phillips was on duty. Wit
ness talked with him at the bar. Stayed
there until after o'clock.
Miller Drew . Gun.
Witness knew Esplin, Lyts and Miller
D
together. while talking with Phillips
Esplin, Lyts and Miller entered a box.
Phillips served two rounds of drinks.
After the second round had been served
Miller came out and accused Phillips Of
robb.ng him. Phillips took gun from
Miller There was a scuffle, and Esplin
struck Miller and knocked him down.
This took place in the barroom. Saw Mil
Ter when he drew the gun. Phillips came
out from behind the bar and took the
gun from Miller.
When asked, on cross-examination, II
he had ever been questioned In regard to
the case prior to the time he was sub
poenaed witness answered that he had
not.
The next witness, Fred Barnard a Ia
borer, testified that he was in the Re-
ception saloon between 4 and o'clock on
the morning OF July s. Was there waiting
for a friend. Stayed there for an hour
and a half. Saw Miller and two other
men come in and buy two or three drinks.
Saw them go into box: were there but
a short time. Saw Phillips take in drinks
at two different times He did not close
the door to the box. and witness saw
him all the time he was serving the
drinks. Did not hear any loud talk until
they came out of the box.
II. P. McKeown, restaurant keeper,
was the next witness, and testified that
on July was keeping a restaurant in
the Clancy block. Worked on the night
shift; saw Phillips come into the restau-
rant that morning. Saw Lyts and Phil
lips come into the place together. 1t was
about 7:S0. They ordered breakfast. Lyts
became impatient and commenced to use
vile and profane language, and was thrown
out before his meal was served. Philips
did not go out until his meal was finished.
He paid for both meals before he sat
down.
Witness did not hear any conversation
about dividing money. Would have heard
II II there had been any such talk. and
was certain that after Phillips came In
and gave his order he did not leave until
he had finished his breakfast. Did not hear
him talking with parties at the restaurant
door.
McKeown was the last witness on the
stand for the daE Z