New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-11-08

l
| IN evidence to show that IL was granted after
| the death of Mrs. Adams and then b1 consent
oI Ihe prosecution, Ex-Governor Black subrnit
teo table compiled by one OF his clerks 70 show
that' although the written exhibits are r,s7s mn,
OF several thousand individual letters. the prose-
| cutlon has based its contention thar NoItra,v
wrote then all upon the similarity found in
| some seventeen letters
| That closed the case for the da4a,ca as NJ
Osborne called Joseph Farrell. the hitherto T,iss-
,ns newark detective. as his first witness in re-
outt4L Al the first trial Of Molineux Farrell
! 'eSeiled tnat he met Molineux near the Market
! ST. railway station. in Newark. on the sfrernoo,
| 'ile SIVer bottle holder was bought NfoIineux
~ UHueI eross-examination in the present trial
! sHlu ne could not remember meeting Farrell that
/ Jay Replying TO Mr.. Osbornes first question
! Farrell said he was sure the evidence h. eavs
| az the first trial was correct
: about what time did Won mar bfr,o,.
about bd ESQ 6 O'Clock in The afrernoon o Decan
RSI RI-WhaS sI I'd did you say to hIm2 Al said. "ello
| aFsIloa Jo @s passed each other. and ne replied
| 9-Was that all: A-That.s all.
| S:T1When did you next see Molineux? Al aon.t
paper stories eS of G aate u vas a5tsr all the news
ncation Of the description by Emma STiIler ne Of rEs
Molineux and eai5- me SiIner @ holder went TO ses
req beard that afternoon '-'-' you Hal no
thing. He only LAUGHED .iT Ale didn't say any
aernSoanfF Nssq aa ssq 2 fsy y0g met MoIlnsu that
E7S-,5ds E71ow far Is that from Hartdegans store? A.
th5eeI91arters Of mile from the stations oils a00us
ness was Hermann & Co s factory? 4@Yss eSr
ststio Ell II US nov you get from that factory 70 the
straight line from the factory which vas a sr N
oCould YOU pass Hartdega3g store roins erou,
INT factory 20 the station? Al could INF LoI,I5
nave 70 walk eight or nine blocks out Of nv Way
| George H. Baker. clerk in the sr,nIo,, ~ ~,
newark postofice. testified that the Burns let
/ Ter. the conceded writing of NIoIfneux was
mailed in Newark within half mile of NoIf
| neux's Office. The letter was on the r7ucb de-
scrloed blue paper, and the object was To throw
uouot on MohneuXs statement that he could
not remember where he wrote it, but was sure
that he had none Of that paper at the factory.
| ATTACKING MRS. sTEPHENsON'S TEsTI-
MONY
| Then Mr.. Osborne tried to upset Mrs Shepben
sons Identification Of Cornish and to prop up the
! account Cornish had given Of his movements oq,
< the afternoon OF December 2S. 1S9S when Mrs
1 stephenson says she saw him at the Postoffce
John Yokum testified that he met Cornish about
4 noon that day. and they took luncheon together.
\ About 25O D. they went to the Office of James
| T. Sullivan No 16 Park Place. to talk over ath-
| letic matters Mr. Sullivan was secretary OF
= the Amateur Athletic Union
r-@,I 0IHow How. .i9nS did you remain in the ofice9 a
! 2-Mas Cornish there all the time? Ale was.
I
! How far is Mr.. SuIivan's office from the Cen
/ eral Postof1ce?'' Mr.. Black asked
/ Mr.. Yokum said he could not tell. but he sz+i-
/ mated that the distance was less than thre.
/ hundred feet.
James Mitchell. an athlete. testified that h
( was in SuIlivan's Office with Cornish until late
/ in the afternoon of the day in question and Mr.
/ Sullivan said he remembered that Cornish was
there that day. but could not remember how
long he remained there.
/ Cornish then went on the stand TO reiterate his
story about being in SuIlivan's office. He denied
that he was in the Postofice that day. He cor
tradicted the story of L ouis Jacobson. the drug
clerk. about purchases of bromO-seItzer Then
, he declared he did not wear an Overcoat on the
afternoon when Mrs Stephenson says she saw
him wearing a brown overcoat at the Postofice.
CORNISH GETS INTO A TRAP
Ex-Governor Black did not take Ions to lead
Cornish into trap Did I understand you tn.
say that you wore no overcoat on this particu-
| lar day?" he asked
Il did say so. and am quite positive that
did not at that time was Cornish's
reply
9wh9ss coat qa 5a you TssT r when h ,S YOU put on
Q.-Bidn.t you own brown ovsrcoat: A,-NO
and winter of 1s9S? Al did not
Now let me read to you your testimony.
taken from the official minutes Of the last trial.
Mr.. Weeks read. az Mr.. Blacks request. Cor
nish's statement: During the fall and winter
of 1895 wore the same Overcoat have got
over there" indicating chair IN the rear OF the
COURT. 1T is brown overcoat I did not wear
a white alpine hat az all last year"
Cornish's face flushed. and he hesitated for p
moment before replying: I don't think test4-
red 70 that. but if it is there suppose did"
Off you did testify to that wasn't it true. A
o@NoVr, why did you testify 10 that If YOU dtdn.t
have brown overcoat? Al may have talked Of
o-And the best reason you can give for this IA
that YOU might have talked about itS T4avs s- yo1
anv better reason than thatc A--No. sir
o-You left Sullivan.s place at $50? A-Tes
Q.-Didn't YOU testify at the coroner's inqusss
4 GRAVE NECESSITY"
o1Isn3,5 there S SrsyS necessity for y9eur
Q.@I read from your testimony at the coroner's
over there II is a brown overcoat-" Didn't Won
testify 20 that? Al can't remember
Q-Yet that was three years ago. and YOU should
have remembered better then than now9 At
Q-Wen. there is a difference between going 20
Suilivan's once ar between go and O'Clock a.
YOU say row. and $50 o'clock, as you testified AZ
OIThere IS a great difference between having
there IS
Howard Adams. witness for the prosecution.
said he was sitting near Mrs. Stephenson in
court on Thursday and he saw TWO men Indicate
Cornish to her as soon as Cornish entered the
courtroom. and she said: rs itg' Adams said
he had known Cornish seven years.
Q-Had he a brown overcoat?'' A-No. sir
DO you know more about Cornish's clothes
Q.-Do YOU make that claim? A--No. sir.
n, ,-o,, balfsva in drAar,z ,-o,,,,- -..-.,