The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-05-04

trial Of this case in Brown county, that
he could not be made a witness by the
state without extreme hazard to its case
and the greatest travesty of justice.
The state regards his testimony as Who'll
ly untrustworthy and in this day the
state should not be compelled to place
on the stand one in whose testimony it
has no faith
General Childs then took up discus
sion Of the law with reference to the
point, and cited the. opinion of the late
Supreme Court Justice Mitchell of Min
nesota, which he said had been written
after Justice Mitchell had digested the
decision Of the Michigan case cited by
the defense. In the course of his re-
marks he again referred to Brooks, say
ing:
''It would be travesty of justice if
the state were compelled to call this
man Brooks, and be bound by his testi-
mony.'
He called the attention of the court
to the fact that there was no exact
precedent. AS to this he said:
This case can be differentiated
from all other cases. cited in that in
no other has there ever been an Asa
2. Brooks as witness.'
He referred to the fact that Judge
Weber, in the same case and under
similar circumstances, had held that it
was. not the duty Of the state to call
| Brooks as a witness. Then Mr. Brown
spoke again and was Interrupted by
Judge Cray, who overruled the motion
| The original motion of the defense had
been that the court, as a matter of
right, direct the state to call Brooks;
Mr.. Brown then renewed the motion,
asking that the court, in it's discretion,
so order. This motion was also denied.
Some Hustling by the Defense.
George R. Koch went to the hotel
as soon as he had finished the evening
meal at his uncle IS. He was unaccom-
s AND Tsn found tha lt the fHi sw
yers were all busy. Then he went to
the balcony, directly. in front of the
ladies parlor, and for half an hour
sat there alone, watching the ever
changing crowd in the office below,
while young lady. played sentimental
Mr.. Somsen, the defendant g brother
in-law, entered Mr.. Browns room, and
few minutes later Mr.. Abbott rushed
upstairs two steps at a time and swung
into his room. George Koch leaped
from his chair and fastened into the
room after Mr.. Abbott A few min
utes later he returned and resumed his
Senator SomervilIe's door and beck
oned. Koch hurried in and the door
was closed. The local attorneys asso-
ciated with the defense, Mr.. Clark and
Mr.. Plau, entered the hotel and went
directly to the apartments of their col
leagues. Together Senator -Somerville,
Mr.. Brown, Mr.. Abbott, Mr.. Somsen,
Mr.. Plau, Mr.. Clark, Asa P. Brooks and
the defendant worked out the plans
for the defense's testimony, which be.
gan today Immediately after Mr.. Alb
bott had completed his address to the
jury.
Carel Cross-Examined.
Mr.. Clark subjected Professor Carel
of the university, to long cross-exam.
ination yesterday afternoon as to the
poison in the blue bottle which Dr. Geb,
hardt received. For nearly an hour the
professor was engaged in giving 2. de-
: tailed description of every minute fea
ture of his analysis.
Mr.. Clark elected that the material
which the chemist had to analvze was 9
little larger than the head Of domestic
or household pin. Coroner Fritschie hac
testified that when he saw the bottle
at New Ulm it contained several little
! pellets, each about the size of millet
, seed. Professor Carel said that all OF
the material was like powder when il
t came to him.
/ The inference left by the defense wa!
that the contents had been tamperec
> with, but General Childs, on redirect
! examination, asked Professor Care
what would be the effect if small pellet.
! of that material were Jared around al
3 in transportation, and the professor sait
: that it would have a tendency to pull
/ verize them.
- y !. .,