The Saint Paul globe., 1901-04-10

borne, referring to Mr. Moore being a
recent arrival in the city. You attend
to your own side of the case. If you had
professional sense of honor you would
not interfere with me in trying the case
at court
Assistant District Attorney Garvin
then stepped between the two men. Am
running fire of accusations and recrim-
nations Mr.. Osborne went back to his
office
Mr.. Moore followed him as far as the
hall
Testimony at the afternoon session was
produced by Mr.. Osborne corroborating
many details Of Jones confession.
Al ton1ght's session Of the Patrick case.
John II. Wallace paying teller Of the
SWenson bank, was shown the Patrick
will of July 80, 1900, the general assign
ments of the Rice property to Patrick
the letter in which Mr. Rice is alleged to
nave given orders for the cremation OF
his body and a certified check for 500. 600
which Patrick gave to Potts, the day
after Mr.. Rice's death, and in each in
stance ne declared that the signatures OF
w. M. Rice attached to them were
forgeries. On cross. examination the wit
ness declared he had seen the Patrick
VIII one day last week in the district
attorneys office. He had compared the
signature on it with deeds in the district
attorneys office bearing the genuine sig
nature and this had convinced him that
the Patrick will was forged.
Walter L. Wetherbee. a clerk in the
SWenson bank, was the next witness.
Wetherbee was one of the witnesses to
the will of 1896 According to testimony
given at this hearing by Valet Jones
Patrick urged Jones to try and get Weth-
erbee to witness will which he conten-
plated forging before he d1'E the so
called Patrick will. According to Jones,
Wetherbee refused to be a partv to the
contemplated fraud, but was neverthe-
less made a beneficiary to the Patrick
VIII as an inducement for him TO keep
silent the fact that he had been ap-
preached in the will matter. The witness
said he had known Valet Jones for two
or three years, and then in face Of OBJ
jections from Attorney Moore, who was
everFuled by the court. related a CONVEX
sation watch took place between Jones
and himself CWetherbee) at the latter's
home in January, 1900. Wetherbee said:
"ALL ARE FORGERIEs.
Jones said Texas lawyer with an
office in the World building, and an en-
ploye Of the Manhattan railway, had first
approached him about the drawing of the
contemplated will
Witness, after testifying that he was
familiar with the handwriting of the late
Mr.. Rice, branded the Patrick will, the
$25,G00 check, the general assignments and
the cremation letter as fOrgeries. Wit
ness swore he had a conversation with
Patrick when the latter called at the Of
flee of Swenson & Sons, in connection
with the certifcatiOn or rne $25,00O check.
Did he tell you you were a legatee
under the will?" Mr. Osborne asked.
'He did not
Did he speak to you about the 1900
will at al?"
He did,
Witness volunteered the testimony that
the general assignments were mentioned
in the conversation. Patrick had told
witness that the Rice property was trans
ferred to him for the drawing up OF
"secret trust which is so frequently
mentioned in this case, hut the purpose OF
which for all that is as much a mystery
as ever
On cross examination by Mr.. Moore the
witness was asked if he had ever spoken
to Jones about the win, after the visit
of the valet to his house in Brooklyn
I'm February witness replied. II
asked Jones what had been done about
the will. Jones said he had dropped the
matter"
Did he ever tell Mr.. Rice about Jones'
propositions" asked Mr. Moore
'I did not witness replied.
''Why did pou not tell this cd man Rice
that a conspiracy to get his money was
being set on foot against him by his SER
vant?' was the next question of Mr..
Moore.
Mr.. Osborne objected.
Justice Jerome said the question showed
Mr.. Moore's purpose to be to discredlt
the witness and he therefore could not
allow it and after some discussion the
question was withdrawn
Court adjourned until tomorrow morn
ing when 1t is expected Capt Baker. Of
Houston, Tex, will take the stand