The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-01-15
S. !. STEVENS
BOUND OVER
To Istrict Court on Charge
ofAttemped Arson.
5000 BAIL WAS GIVEN
Tense Offered No Testimony
and Waived Their Rights.
0 INTRODUCE EVIDENCE
Court Room Was Filled VI it'll
interested ListnerS.
5000 BAIL WAS GIVEN
0 INTRODUCE EVIDENCE


city court yesterday on the charge Of at
tempted arson. His bond was fixed at
$1,000. which his father, ". F. Stevens.
signed and he was released from custody
TO await the setting of the trial IL the
district court.
Mr. Stevens was defended by George
Adams. of the firm OF Adams & Adams.
and Paul Brown, of the firm Of Brown
& Brown. With the exception of the
cross-examination Of witness by the de-
lenses attorney, no attempt was made TO
defend Mr. Stevens. No testimony was
offered in his behalf and when County
Attorney Eckstein announced that the
state would rest its case. Mr.. Adams adj
dressed the court and announced that
the defendant would waive all rights 70
introduce testimony in his own behalf
and the court was at liberty 10 bind him
over.
Without doubt the largest crowd that
ever attended a preliminary hearing in
this city was present in the city court
room yesterday. Every seat in theaudi-
forum was taken and nearly a hundred
people stood along the walls. Inside the
bar many lawyers gathered and stood
back of the jury stand and listened TO
the testimony.
There were many women in the audi
ence. Some were friends of the accused
some did not know him and came cut Of
curiosity. some came just because the
case had caused considerable excitement
over the city ard they wanted to see
what would be the outcome.
There never was more attentive audi
enee than the one yesterday Every per-
ron was silent and at times during the
trial there was a silence that was op-
pressive. During the taking Of evidence
OF Importance a pin dropped in one cor
ner of the room could have been heard
1t the fartherest corner.
When the court convened at 10 o'clock
the room was filed and everyone kept
their seats until the recess for dinner
was taken. Those who stood up remained
IN their places. In the afternoon the
crowd was made up of the same people
as were present during the morning ses-
sion with a few newcomers. Morning and
afternoon were the same, the people
were very attentive. Some of the wit
nesses lost their voice when they took
the stand and 1t was with difficulty that
they could be heard in the rear OF the
house. IN some cases the stenographers,
ten feet away. coula hardly hear the
words spoken by the witness. The peo-
pie strained every nerve to catch the
words.
All that the state offered as evidence
was circumstantial. Mr. Stevens made
an affidavit that he was not near his
wifes store on the afternoon OF January
J. until he was notified of the attempt
20 burn the store.
The affidavit was offered as testimony
and then the state introduced two wit
nesses who swore that they saw Mr..
Stevens on the sidewalk almost in front
of his wife's store about o'clock that
evening and the attempt TO burn the
store was not discovered until half an
hour later.
In his affidavit Mr. Stevens stated that
after a visit to his mother-in-law' home
accompanied by her son. he took pack
ing house car and rode down 10 the cor
ner OF First and Main street, where he
got OF and walked 10 the Palace livery
barn. on Lawrence avenue, and with his
brother-in-law he drove to his home on
Hydraulic avenue. The state introduced
three witnesses who swere that when
Mr. Stevens called for his horse at the
barn about o'clock. he was alone and
drove away from the barn alone.
Aside from this the state offered no tes-
tinony that would prove Mr.. Stevens
chraged The witnesses corroborated
each others account so closely that it
would seem impossible 10 break the evil
dence-
The zwo young women who first discov-
cred the fire trap told 4 good and
straightforward story Of the occurrence.
They answered all questions 10 the best
Of their ability and their account OF the
discovery was a most interesting one
All OF the witnesses told their part OF the
occurrence Of the day as far as this case
vas concerned in a most straightfor-
ward manner ard every bit Of testimony
offered was facts
Mr.. Stevens and his wife. during the
morning session. sat just at the back Of
the attorneys Mrs. Stevens was rot
present 0urlN- tlf aItSEDt'U- MI Sc
vens often conferred with his attorneys
He was composed. and carefully scrrIti
nized each witness. and during the time
evidence was being taken he glanced AZ
the attorney when he asked the question
rnd az the witness rs the answer was
given.
Miss Bertha Hereford. one Of the young
women who discovered the fire-trap was
,he first witness called. She has been
employed by Mrs. Stevens since October
II. Mr. Eckstein conducted the direct
examination in part as follows:
''Did you have any ARRANGEMENTS made
&c meet ar. Stevens OF January -
'At S o'clock 10 attend the theater'
what time did you leave the store?'
Between l2-a and L
s@Who was there
'sMr. and Mrs. Stevens. Miss AIspsugh
ard myself.
who was last one OUT"
81 don't know"
.What was condition OF curtains
'Tkey were down.
She stated that an invoice q the stocl
vas taken about the middle OF Deem
Der
DO you remember the splicing Of th'
curtains
Yes. sir; about the middle Of Deem
bsg."