Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-03-09

[ Jected. MT Kennedy claimed that II it was allowable to name one witness all of them should be named. Objec- ton was sustained.
 MT Marsh said he could not say if Wolcott testified only on June 4, be cause the records do not show. A witness name is entered on the rec ord only when he is sworn. If he is recalled to the stand the record does not show it. This seems to be the usual way of keeping the records in all the courts.
 The records did not show whether Or not accused had been discharged from custody upon the verdict of mot guilty" by the jury, and the ab- sence of any record to show that he was on bail during the trial was ta- ken by the defense as proof that he was then In the custody of the sher- if
 stenographers was then introduced by the state to show that he testified at the former trial for the state and to also show that he testified that tVandemark was at Wolcott's pool room, at Hurlburt's shop, at Faber's switch, and that he took part in the
 
 evidence on the grounds, first, because Wolcott was present himself and was the evidence, and that his evidence had nothing to do with the present case. The court ruled it. in and an exception was taken.
 MT Kennedy then filed an objec- tion to Attorney c. G. Root appearing as assistant to Assistant States At torney Kellogg on the grounds that on previous occasions Judge George w.. Wheeler of Bridgeport would not al low MT 0'Neill to assist the state and on a former occasion also prohibited Attorney John O'NeilI The court ruled against the objection. Portions Of Wolcott's evidence re- lating to the eight trolley strikers trial last spring and their actions and whereabouts on the night of the as sault were then read by MT Kellogg MT Kennedy objected and the ruling was against him. the court saying that the evidence was allowed, not to show the guilt or innocence of the ac- cused, but that it was material to the issue before the jury at that time. r All of Vandemarks evidence was then read by MT Root, the court rul- ing against tue material parts alone being read.
 Briefly. this was q direct contTadic- tion of Wolcott's evidence. which was that accused and the others left his (Wolcott's) pool room the night of the assault, February 26. in twos and threes; that they assembled at Hurl- burts shop, proceeded to Faber's switch and assaulted Merna and Mor- rissette, the car crew. and that few days later accused warned the boys to keep their traps shut" because he had heard ''one of the scabs was dead"
 MT Root finished, after objections were made to almost every other line Of the tlfaRscript and which were all overruled.
 MOrrissette was then sworn and he went over the testimony which he already gave at the first trial and re peated at the trial of the boys. No objection was raised until the state proceeded to identify the ac- cused. Then MT Danaher objected most strenuously. The court over ruled the objection and MT Kellogg was proceeding when MT Kennedy in sisted on the objection and asked for q hearing on the point raised. The court held the point had been already determined by him. Mir Kennedy, however, rather insisted upon a hear ing and said MT Danaher was pre- pared to argue it and that 1t would either shorten or prolong the trial. Again the court asked if the mat ter had not been decided already.
 MT Kennedy allowed that 1t may have been. The court said the case had now gone to q point where no further time could be wasted. How | ever, he allowed Mir Danaher to speak and the latter had spoken a while when the court said he would not hear any further arguments, but If he had any further authorities, to men, ton them. Mir Danaher concluded his statement with the words that the authority he quoted was conclu- sive or nothing.
 The objection was overruled and an exception allowed.
 MorriSsette then proceeded and said he identified accused as one of the crowd that assaulted him; that he carried q revolver, was outside the car and kept the weapon pointed at him as he walked from one end to the other of the car in obeyino the order Of the two men who entered it. Under cross examination Morris | sette said he has not worked since last fall and to the question how he has lived since then, he said he has been living on his money. "How much money did you have last fall?"
 Enough to live on."
 Question repeated; objected and al lowed.
 Repeated again, said: eff you want to find out go to the bank" Being repeated again, he said he would not tell. Then he said he had $3, GOO i'll a bank in Montreal.
 The court thought the examination had gone far enough. but MT Danaher claimed 1t to show the witness story was utterly improbable. He said he did not receive any money after for testifying here last fall, only what he