Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-06-05

been 10 W OICOILS pool room on the grounds that his answer might tend to incriminate him. On the same grounds he refused to say if he knew the ac- cused, but later did answer, saying that he knew some of them, Ross and one of the Vandemarks when they were working on the cars. He declin- ed to say if he saw them on the even- ing of February 26. Witness refused to answer and MT Williams pressing for answers, MT Hamilton arose in de- fense of the witness and said the con- duct of the state was unfair and he should stop. Witness was only doing what citizen of a free country had the right to do. He objected to further questioning.
 MT O'NeilI said MT Williams's pur- pose was to impress upon the jury the witness attitude and it was unfair and unjust for the state to continue in that way.
 MT Williams replied that the witness may refuse to answer one question and yet answer another. The court ruled for the state.
 Witness was asked if he had not tes- tified he was at the tracks. Objection was filed and sustained. MT Williams asked a few more questions and wit ness refusing to answer, he stopped.
 The witness was then excused. Charles Thorpe, the next witness was also warned about his answers. He took the course of the previous witness, declining to say if he had ever been in Wolcott's pool room, but he reconsider ed and said he had been there many times. Another wrangle took place over MT Wi1liams's method of examin- ation, and the court stated that he did not think it necessary for two or more of the defense to accuse the state at torney of unfair conduct. The defense claimed MT Williams was pressing questions which witness had declined to answer and unless they objected they could not maintain their rights.
 Michael Ryan, the next witness said his age was 19. He knew some of the accused, Brearton and Ross, also Vol colt and his pool room. He declined to say if he was in the pool room on the night of February 26, and if Brearton, Ross and others were not there also. He declined to say if he was at the switch on that night. He was then ex cused.
 Thomas A. Kenney, another of the boy witnesses took advantage of the law which gives protection to a witness under arrest by declining to answer the questions.
 Stephen Ball knew Ross and James Ennis. He declined to say if he were with Ennis, Ross and Brearton the night of the assault
 William D. Costello knew Winnegar, Marsh, James Ennis and Wolcott. He was in the latter's pool room a few times. He also declined to answer be- cause his evidence might incriminate him.
 Thomas Quinn, after answering the customary preliminaries declined to testify further.
 James J. Whitty, IS, adopted the same course. He was more reticent than any of the others.
 James J. Quinn knew Wolcott about eight years. Further than admitting this and that he knew a few of the ac- cused he declined to answer.
 Wolcott was recalled to the stand and he testified that all the witnesses who declined to answer were the young men whom he referred to in his testi- mony yesterday.
 Afternoon Session Opened
 The afternoon session began with q new face shown in the case. Frederick Pretat was put on the stand. He said his occupation is a die sinker at Roger & Bros and on February 26 last he re- sided in Waterville. He was on a car at Faber's switch going toward Waterville on that night. He saw two large stones on the track, one weighing about 150 pounds and the other POO pounds, and beyond them was a pile of smaller stones, not far from bend i'll the track. Witness saw MOrrisSette running about 300 yards from the stones and ill the direction of Water bury. He was waving his arms and the car on which witness was riding stopped. His face was cut and blood was on it. He appeared to be battered up. Blood was also on his clothes. MOrrisSette was taken into the car. Witness helped him in, but he thought he could get in without assistance. He sat down in the car and the car re- versed toward Waterbury. Witness left it at West Main street and went home in hack.
 Cross-examined by MT Hamilton, witness said he was at Polls theater that night. He thought the perform ance was over about 11:15 o'clock. He immediately took a car for WatervilIe. There were three other passengers on the car, John Bride, John Fosset and witness's wife. Witness was on the front platform. He saw the piles of stones before he saw Morrissette. It was about sixty feet distant. The car stopped at the pile of stones and when it was removed the car continued, and about fifteen minutes later Morrissette appeared ill view.
 It took half an hour flor the car to reach where the stones were, or about II :45 o'clock.
 Miss Almira Twining, assistant Ii- brarian at the Bronson library the next witness testified she lives on the Boulevard. She was at home on the night of the assault and heard cries and shouts, about 113O, but could not tell the character of the cries. whether of joy or distress. They seemed to come from distance, in the direction of Cooke street. She was positive they did not come from the direction of Wa