The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-03-15
PROSECUTION WAS AIDED
By One of the Witnesses Who VOlun.
teered for the Defense.
MRS. CARPENTER is VALUABLE.
She Told of a Conversation Between Pat.
rick aud Rice,
A NEGRO WOMAN ON THE STAND
Who Told OF Admitting Patrick to the
Apartments of MIR. Rice on Orders
from the Latter.
A NEGRO WOMAN ON THE STAND
Especial to The Post9


tapt 10 disproye than the statement Of an
admittedly excited man who says he saw
towel saturated with chloroform blaze up
when a match was applied to It is that
which concerns Jones contention in his tes-
timouy in the Patrick trial that Rice never
met the defendant. The prosecution can
explain away the wild statements Of Jones
that NAV he more or less successfully con
tradictcd by other witnesses, but what VIII
hc more difficult for MIR Osborne to do VIII
be to make his theory anpear to.be the only
possible one beyond a reasonable doubt II
It Is seemingly shown that Pattck was iu-
deed q friend and adviser OF Rire, especial
ly about that time when the defense say
the will Of 1900 was written.
To-day the defense introduced It's first
witness to contradict this important fca-
ture Of Jones story.
Maria scout. a negro servant, who had
charge Of Rice's apartments, was
witness She said she knew Patrick hy
sight and she said she opened the door Of
Rice's room for Patrick two or three times,
She saw Rice write several ctfckS on the
Saturday before he died She birped Rices
bed linen in the kitchen stove ifter he had
died and she found the stove clan. Charles
+. Jones had testified that he burnsA the
choroform saturated towel Will which Rice
was killed In this stove, In acr cross eX-
animation Mrs Scott said Pathck told her
when Rices body was taken iway for tue
autopsy that she was suspected of poison
ing him, but she said 1t w9s Jones who
warned her not to talk abcm the matter.
The witness said that h contradiction
was due to Mr. osborueG 1eSrlng lssr, How
| ever valuable this evidence might he. it
was rather spoiled by the woman telling Of
! seeing Mr. Rice with what she said looked
| like checks at tho time, when, according to
the defense. he should have had them.
To put II as it appcaecd to those who
heard her. II seemed as II the witness had
rather confused what She thought she ought
| to have seen with whit she later heard.
Her noting a fact such as Rice having
checks at & certain time was rather incon-
siS'ent with the dgrec Of intellect she
showed in other parts Of her testimony.
1t ia to he remembered that the counsel
for the defendant ls about to put upon
| the stand witness who will claim he saw
Rice sign the check under suspicion.
AS far as the days proceedings were con
ocrned, it would have been difficult to tel
which side was really presenting its case
Mr., Charles T. Adams, who sent Mr.
Moore a letter few days ago that he
could give valuable testimony as to Mr.
| Rice's desire to be tremated, proved to b,
n boomerang to the defense. The Testimony
he was to have given in Patrick's interes
was ruled out and that which he did Civ,
was to the effect thar the signature upoI
the 1900 will was, in his opinion, for
gerry.
Adams said Rice was engaged In business
with his father and that he, the witness
and Rice were on friendly terms for thirtl
years. He had had conversation witt
Rice some time in 1900, IN which Rice CAV,
his views on cremation and he wrote
letter tc Patrlck's counsel at the close o
the prosecutions case telling of their con
yersation He identined the letter. II
also Identified letter he received iron
Mr.. Rice on October IS, 1897, instructin
him to prepare codicl altering the vii
executed in 1896. The provisions Of tn
changes desired were not told by the wit
ness.
Adams was not SLOWED to tell what Ric
had said about cremation. In answer I
question ny Assistant District Attorne
Osborne, Adams said the signatures to tn
1900 viii we're not in the handwriting o
Rice.
Mr.. Turner. who Is now an active fore
In the case. tried to claim that the witnes
was not an expert but his testimony ha
been given without objection, and wha
ever II was It had to stand.
That Of the elevator man who later to
tilted that he had taken Patrick up 20 Rice
apartment was more in line with Jone
testimony rather than against It.
Near the close Of the day, the most vail
able witness that the defense has pr
sented so far was put upon the stand. Thu
Mr.. Moore has the ability TO crente enc
as well as Mr. Osborne is beginning to
suspected by the way he closes each day
proceedings with the most Important wi
nesses he has 10 present. Today close
with the jury retaining the impression th'
Mrs Isabelle Carpenter was able TO Civ
She was q most satisfactory aud importni
witness, both IN what she actually sal
and in her manner, strongly marked by 4
apparent impartiality and truthfulness.
Mrs Carpenter said she was a lice-lor
friend of Rice and bis wife. She said 81
once saw Patrick in Rlce's room. Ri
handed Patrick paper end told the wi
ness he was very busy then Patrick al
| Rice went into another room, where tbs