Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1901-12-26


jured soul awRy?"
Mr.. Bird said the hardest task Of his
professional life was to assail witness,
aud as much as he regretted it, he had
to attack Lawrence M. Whiteman: for
if the jury believed Wbiteman, Lynn
was guilty; II it did not believe White
man, Lynn was absolutely Innocent.
1t would not be, correct to say Lynn
had no interest. He had the interest
OF desire for liberty, for free ar, for
association Of wife and children. 30
that in the matter OF interest, the de-
fence was not in the same position ms
the State. But Mr. Bird asked the
jury to consider the kind OF testimony
produced by the defence. lie reviewed
the evidence pertaining to the inter
view at Lynns house, when Lynn
claimed to have given Whitemun the
SIC, Bnd argued as TO the reasonable
ness OF the defendants story with the
eorroborntion Of pansant and johnson.
He maintained that il tansant lied,
then Patrick Fahey, who sa d he took
lansant to Lynn o, must have LIED.
Referring to the likelihood that Van
smut and johnson cou ID identify White
man, he said he would say that it was
a face one ought to remember 10 or 10
years.. Sifted down, he held that it
was a case OF three men, Lynn, Vansant
ald johnson, against one, Whiremsn.
lie declared that the evidence put
aga nst Mr.. Lynn was a tlimsy, filthy
fabric.
From ali the clamor," continued
Mr.. Bird, you m ght have supposed
every me nber of the Levy Court had
his bair curled 10 diamonds. Yet the
total allowed for the work on that
bridge was about s2l5 Well, IL that
IS q steal they better go and steal
apples from q warehouse. -
There are Others" suggested Mr..
Ward.
swell, we will meet them when we
| come 10 them, exclaimed Mr.. Bird.
Mr.. Bid received the Testimony of
the witnesses called by the defence to
testify to tine character of Mr.. Lynn.
lie said the attorney general had rot
put ON any witnesses to prove anything
to the contrary; had he been able hts
gentle nature might have forbade him
doing so lie closed by calling upon
the lurymen to do their duty accord
ing to the sworn testimony. He said the
trial had been hard labor for him
ana he realized that 1t was hard on the
jury.
MI. WAND CLOSES FOR THE STATE.
A ,torney- General Ward, who made
the, closing Argument az tho tr. al, after
telling how much he regretted being
called upon to prosecute n man who
has arisen to the position of John
Lynn, ne had, upon assuming his Office,
taken an oath to do his whole duty,
without ienr or favor. and he proposed
to do so. and the jury had taken a simi-
lar oath and was expected to do Its
duty,
II Lawrence NJ. Whitemnu told the
truth, Mr.. Ward said, Mr.. Lynn is
guilty. The State did not, however,
depend upon the testimony Of Lawrence
M. Wbitsman, because his testimony
was corroborated by Others. The at
torney-general said he was of the
opinion that John Lynn had believed
all along, since the action was brought,
that he must smash the testimony OF
Whiteman, or he would be convicted.
First the defendant brought two wit
1esses to break down a vital Eoint, en-
dsavoring TO show that Lynn agreed
with Whitenan for the former to get
the warrant oashed and turn the money
over to him to save him from coming
iuhp tHc WY lhdt was U,
Whiteman did get warrant from the
county for $3.50 10 August. lie did not
have to cone to Wilmington to get the
warrant cashed. He lives near Newark
and there ia bank in that community.
A New Castle county warrant will lie
cashed at any bank in the county. The
story was thar Wbiteman got the money
IN the present controversy few pistol
shotl from, Wilmington. Why did he
come that near the city. The witnesses
on this pon Mt wero an employe of
Patrick Fahey and an employee of John
Lynn. Another condition was that
what was said when witnesses allege
the money was paid must be- said in
loud voice, so that people ut the back
fence could hear that there must be
controversy over the bill.
Referring to Caleb Johnsons teAti-
mony, Mr.. Ward said johnson was not
at Lynn's house at the time mentioned,
il his testimony ms to when he was
there was correct When asked TO &C.
count for his presence, johnson said he
was not working that day and was at
John Lynn's asking for work; that " IS
before he went 10 work for Henry
Stewart, According to the testimony,
he began to work for Henry Stewart
on the I'd of October, and, If that was
the case he wal not at Lynu's on the
10th, 18th or 18th. If Caleb johnson
told the truth in these particulars he
was not at John Lynn's at the time
ment oned. II ne was not there Mr..
Ward said with emphasis, John Lynn
testimony stands as fabrication, for
he said johnson was there Whiteman
admits that he worked on Tweed's
bridge, but the warrant for 1853 which
he got in August, raid him for that
work. The State produced Mr. Hark- |
ness, carpenter. who passed over the |
bridge the 9th of August, the day be.
fore the Sl5a warrant was drawn, and
he says the work was completed then.
That work being done at that time and
the warrant being drawn The next day
there was no occasion for VIII teman to |
be at John Lynn's house for more
money in October.
Referring to Whitemau's testiompy
to the effect that no had been offered
$500 by Lynn tc change his testimony.
he called attention to the fact thar Mr.,
Phillips did not hear everything that
took place between Lynn and Whits.
man, and spoke of the absurdIty of
such matter being talked 10 o CONVEX.
sutional tone in a street car.
As to Whiteman, Mr., Ward said the |
first time he went to the attorney
generals office, 1t was In response to a |
subpoena, with all Of the cover Of tbe
state back OF il, and every time he |
testified it was under oath.
This fight is not against John Lynn |
or any other man, Mr.. Ward said with |
emphasis, in closing, sit Ia AGAINST |