Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-04-25
THE EASTMAN TRIAL.
Strong Evidence Against But important Hu''"g
In Prisoners Favor.

Cambridge. Mass, April IA VII
ness who claimed to have seen the en-
counter between Charles X. Eastman
and his brother-in-law. Richard. III
Grogan. Jr., ON July II. 1900, the DAY
on which frogan was killed. ana i"'
| the murder OF whom Eastman IS no"
on trial at East Cambridge. was th'
| first one called at today's opening Ses'
sion. He was Walter -. Titus, drug
gist. employed in Boston. but lVinB ~
Cambridge.
the court room proved to small, To-
day. to accommodate all who wished IL
gain admission. For two hours after
the opening large number st""d
around the doors waiting for Il chance
To get in&ile. Tho accused man seemed
To lave gained considerable rest dur
ms the night.
In the continued absence OF District
Alton neE Weir. Assistant District At
tofney Sanderron conducted the exam
nation for the prosecution.
Mr.. Titus in substance said that
Will" passing the rear of the Clark
estate on July 4. he heard ''frightful
ironns." followed by tn" words "oh.
Gon't' Oh don't" They seemed to
como from point beyond low build
ing and witness walked around by the
fence where he could see into the on
tloSurc. Two men were struggling. APP
rar.ntly for the possession Of q dark
object As they swaycd back and
forth the shorter man groan"d and at
l.nGth broke away. saying; Charles.
you've murdered me-" These words
were repeated ana then the man threw
y Is hands nj ri toward the h"us1.
The taller man. Eastman. followed
"lowly. He had in his hand what look
"a like an "idfashinnod revolver which
he held down by his side.
Titus then went 10 the front of the
house. where h" saw persons going
lack end forth. Rcing shown TWO re-
volycrs. witness identified Il Colt Al
valibre as the one he had seen In the
possession of Eastman.
cross-eXamination ~ the witness was
very brief. He was asked TO whom H.
Lad talked about what he had seen.
He said he had spoken To his fellow
Jerks in Boston. and also to n clerk
whom he knew IN Cambridge. besides
having ;uld his story 10 IN. police. II"
said he had not talked with newspaper
men.
\ 10 minutes recess was taken ut II
o'clock ana Mrs. Eastman, the wife Of
the defendant. spent the time in con
verSng with her husband. who stood
UP in the docket, and who, although
rested from his sleep. was pale and
feemed anxious. After recess Witness
Titus, still under cross-examination.
said that when he saw the two mon
struggling they were standing side 10y
side their faces turned away from him.
Trey we're standing In gateway
three ana onc-half feet wide. He adj
mittcd that anything he saw OF the
mon after they parted must have been
seen through tn" picket fence which
ran from either side Of the gateway.
Asked with reference to Eastman's
condition. tine witness said that the de-
PENDANT appeared to be dazrd.
In the afternoon Judges Gaskill and
Aiken made an important ruling in favor
Of the defence by refusing 20 admit prac-
ticaIly evidence which the government in
tended TO present as showing the dying
statements OF Grogau. This has the cf
feet OF striking out much az the testimn-
ny allowed in the lower court. The point
was raised Just after I.ottiC Rroughto1
had been asked what Grogan said when
she saw linn run. Attorney Elder Tor tho
defence. stated that Re apprchcnded that
what the Erougton girl was 20 testify ~
as To what Grogan said was Charles
' i've murdered me He clntvrdcd that
this ana other like evidence was inCom
peteut because II represented the op'nion
uf the deceased as to The motive of Tho
act OF shootinb. because il did not con
S,itute n diving declaration and because
IL did not form part Of the res gestae
OF circumstances Immediately surround
ing the act.
Attorney Knowlton for the government.
argued for the admission Of the evidence
in question on the ground that IL was a
diving declaration ana that !. was cir
cumstanCe surrounding the act.
Judges GasNil and Aiken retired to-
about an hour and then the former ruled
that If the answer expected from the Wit
ness. that is. Charles. you've murdered
me meant more than simply killed
mo" IL involved an inference from fac
and implied the belief of the existence ot
malice aforethought; and as that could
not be statement OF fact the court
wolld exclude it, The court did not think
the statement competent as dying dec
laration-
decided to exclude the answer which Gro
gan the deceased made TO the nurse
testimony which has not yet been intro
duced-when she told him rs he was ~
ing on the ground that Eastman had sal
that he did not intend TO kill him. that
il was an accident. rms response on
Grogan's part was. Yes. y" diu 90 IL.
Judge caskill ruled. however, that al
though this statement could not go IN. IN
Jury could be told that Groean hid diS-
scented from Eastman's remark ABOUT Il
having been an accident.
With this exception and with the oX-
ception OF ne evidence Of Walter D. ILL
tus that Grogan had SAID tharitS'
yo,,.vc murdered me" all fcstimpn with
rcsnect to accusations on the part o. the
deceased is prohibited and the evidence
of Titus IS allowed only bccaaSs NJ
the struggle for the revolver and imme-
diatelv after the shooting.
Great interest was attached 10 'hc ht M
Mrs Gro.an. She said that on the alter
noon of July 4. Mr.. Eastman sugSeS'eu 10
Mr. C;rogan that they 80 down ana shoot
~ , target She went about yer WORK
and a little later heard cries for help. Sht
ran down stairs and saw Gr"San IIihii.I
and fell Eastman followed him ana iiia
Something which he held in his rSh'