The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-06-09
ADMITTED HIS GUILT
Nick HawOrth Confessed to His
Attorney.
OVERHEARD AT THEJAIL
DAMAGING EVIDENCE AGAINST
THE ALLEGED MURDERER.
Correspondence)


Pennington, June S-The testimony
in the Haworth trial today was almost
as pointed and interesting as that given
by Sheriff Abbott yesterday afternoon.
William Broadly was an exceptionally
clever witness. Not once was he dis
committed by the defendants attorneys,
and even when questions touching his
own criminal career were prooounded
his answers we - straightforward. His
testimony of the defendants admissions
will undoubtedly have weight in the
case.
The direct evidence for the state is
nearly all in, and it win be completed
tomorrow.
1t was stated today that the defense
expects to put Hawocth of the stand in
his own behalf to rebut the testimony
of the states witnesses as to the confess
siOns that have been put in evidence.
1t may be late tomorrow before the de-
tense gets started and, as there are
more than fifty witnesses TO be exam
ined, it will be seen that the trial viii
occupy nearly all of next week.
The croSs-examinatiOn of Sheriff Alb
bott was resumed this morning by Mr..
Weber, and witness denied that he told
anything that was not true in the con-
versation with HaWorth that led up to
the confession on March 80.
Broady's Testimony.
The next witness called was William
Broadly. who is a prisoner in the county
Jail charged with burglary.
There was a contest between the at
torneyS on the question of the admissa-
bility Of testimony between an attorney
and his client. This point was argued
when the witness said he overheard Mr..
Weber and Haworth talking in the Jail
on March 81, 1899.
The testimony was allowed to go in,
an exception being noted by the de-
Tense
Witness then testified that he heard
HaWOrth tell Mr.. Weber on March 81,
that he had confessed to Sheriff Alb
bolt; that the confession had been read
to him, and that ne had said it was cor
rect; that he left Ogden on the night
of March Is, 1889, and came down to
Layton, tied his team by the roadside
and waited around until about 1880,
and then went into the store. Witness
said that at this point Mr.. Weber said
to defendant, Now look at me, Nick;
look me ~ the eye. Are you guilty?"
and defendant answered: Yes, I am"
Mr.. Weber said: "Oh, well, that settles
yourself, while your brother and 1 are
doing all We can for you" Defendant
made no reply. and Mr.. Weber told him
to keep his mouth shut in the future.
Wanted to Escape.
Witness related several conversations
had with HaWorth while the two were
alone in the Jail. Defendant had often
suggested that they try to escape, and
the chance of being able to procure
saws and cut their way out had been
suggested. Haworth was determined to
get away, and on April 16 or II, had q
plan laid to deceive the jailer by max
ing him think the cell door was locked,
and then, when the cage was unlocked,
as it always was when the food was
passed in, the plan was for defendant
to jump out and bolt from the Jail. The
scheme failed, owing to the aIertness
of the jailer, who discovered before I'M
locking the cage that the cell dorr was
not bolted. Witness demonstrated with
HawOrth and toldu him there was no
chance to escape, but the latter said
he could get in the hills and stay a few
days, and then get away. When told
by witness that such an attempt, if IN
successful, would injure his chances for
acquittal when his trial occurred, Haw-
orth had said: My case couldn't be a
id bit worse than it is. !"
The last conversation on the question
of escaping was last Monday evening,
Last Sunday a conversation was had
between witness and the defendant on
the question OF Bill Reayis' arrest; wit
ness had said it was too bad that ReaV-
IS was not arrested at the same time
as defendant; that they might have
counSeled together, and HawOrth re-
piled: Yes, Bill is a smart fellow.
He is not such a id fool as I am. -
Defendant said at that time that he
did not think Reavis would testify
against him. Witness said he convers-
ed with Reavis in the Jail, and the lat
ter was very anxious to know whether
Haworth had an overcoat when arrest
ed; later witness asked defendant about
it and HawOrth said he had thrown his
Overcoat away When witness asked
Haworth if ReaYis went in the store
with him that night, defendant said ::
NO" then said: Yes" finally refusing
to discuss it, saying: Il don't know
what Reavis did" Defendant had told
witness that both he and Reavis had
the gun and both handled it.
The credibility of the witness was
attacked by Mr.. Weber in his cross
examination. It was brought out that
the witness has served a term in the
Utah penitentiary, under the name of
Johnson; that he escaped from the
Utah county jail, and that he has
been under arrest at various times
and places on minor charges.
During the progress of the cross
examination recess was taken.
AT the afternoon session the cross
examination of Broadly was continued,
but nothing new was brought out.
Haworth's Second Confession.
Deputy Sheriff Jed Abbott testified
to a conversation he had on the even
ing of March 49, 1900, with defendant,
during which Haworth said he would
like to plead guilty when audge Rolapp
came down again. Next morning the
defendant repeated the statement and
witness asked what he wanted to
plead guilty to? Defendant said to
the crime of killing Sandal. Witness
then related what followed. being sub
stantially the same confession that was
given to Sheriff Abbott and Mr..
Ellison. Defendant had said he went
to the store to get some provisions,
and did not think of killing the night
Waterman when he went in; did so in
self-defense when Sandal drew a
pistol on him. He said a shotgun was
used. and the murdered man did not
speak after being shot.
To Mr. Hamilton witness said there
was a conversation between him and
defendant before the confession was
made in which the latter asked if he
could get a lighter sentence on a plea
of guilty than if he was tried; wit
ness replied that that was with the
Judge; in some cases leniency might
be shown.
Counsel then moved to strike out
Mr. Ahbotts testimony of the confess
sion and argued that it was obtained
after inducements had been offered to
defendant. Judge Rolapp oyerruled
the motion, reserving the right to
change his ruling.
E. P Ellison was recalled and ques-
toned as to the confession made to