Waterbury Democrat., 1901-09-13

launched forth and when he had been going for some time the court asked
 Mir Kennedy .show much of this'' he needed. Mir Kennedy, who was stand ing like Napoleon is popularly pie tured, arms folded across his chest and his head bowed, said he wanted to show the witness's interest in the case; why he spoke to a witness who had just left the stand, coached him to tell different story, and that Cardinal did tell q different story after his con yersation with .Iollette. Witness now stood up in the stand and stated that hsa said to Cardinal that he, Cardinal, made a mistake ill his evidence, and 10 be careful and to keep cool. He was asked if he had spoken to anybody yes terday during recess besides Cardinal. This question apparently agitated him So that he said he could not answer it. MT Kennedy asked witness if he had belonged to the Carpenters union. This question was objected to and the question of the Carpenters union being on trial came up. Judge Cowell and Attorney Bradstreet claimed it was not Mr Kennedy held it was, that he was on trial for certainNacts of his as representative and delegate of the carpenters, and therefore the union as well as it's representative was on trial. The complaint read so, yet the court and the prosecuting attorney held it did not.
 In his redirect testimony toilette, af- ter q good deal of trouble, was brought down to his meeting with Cardinal and Sandiford in Harwick & Gill's office. He said that he asked Sandiford at that place, For the Lords sake, and no matter what he had against him, toilette, to let Cardinal alone"
 MT Kennedy asked him if this con versation did not take place at MT Sandiford's house This terribly ex- cited toilette. He stood up in the box, shook his hands and launched into a torrent of speech that could not be stopped until he had exhausted him. self When he had reached this point he sat down. He was asked another question and he fiared up again. He said he would not stand the order or dictation of criminal who goes about the street with his hands in his pock- cts. He was asked whom he referred to as a ''criminal,' and replied he would not answer but at last let it be understood that he meant Sandi- ford He concluded his testimony say ing that though he knew Sandiford was trying to cut his throat he was still friendly to him. toilette was the most intractable witness that was ever heard in the district court.
 Abraham Cabanna, the man over whom the alleged trouble took place, was the next witness. He had the con- tract for shingling a house Cardinal was building. He told the court he had been discharged from his contract by Cardinal, on account of Sandiford' $ objection. Cabanna not being a union man. This witness told his story with out any hesitation or Interruption.
 Under cross examination he said he once belonged to the Lathers' union, that he was fined S5 for employing non-union men and rather than pay the fine he gave up the union. He de- nied being expelled but admitted charges were brought against him. He also denied having collected money from fellow members and that he fail ed to turn it over to the union. This question was objected but Mir Kennedy claimed it to discredit the witness. In support of his claim he held that he could prove that the witness was dis honest in his dealings with the union when he was member and for his actions was expelled. Therefore, it would be evident that the witness was preJudiced toward the union and the accused. Attorney Bradstreet claimed all this was irregular The court thought so too, but sIr Kennedy main tained that he had the right to bring out the witness career for the past year. The court decided that to enter this matter would be to put the Lath- ers' union on trial and therefore the question could not be allowed