New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1905-05-10


seen Dir. Koch and his skirts were clean.
and it was not him. Witness admitted
that the evidence had been properly
quoted.
Then you were going to test the iden
tity of the man seen by looking into
DIR. Koch's eyes?"
"Yon haven't told of my relation to
that statement?"
Gen. Childs read more at length
Mr.. Brooks said that he had testified
that he had no recollection Of such a
conversation, but had said that he would
take Justice Henningsen's word for it,
for he did not want to call Justice Hen
nngsen liar in his own court
And now You deny that that answer
was correct?"
eyes SIR
Preparing for Impeachment.
Witness said ne had no recollection of
meeting Sheriff Julius at his office the
night of the murder, but he might have
been there. Gen. Childs quoted from a
conversation between the two at that
time, when Brooks had his head down
and Julius asked why he did not get
up, and Brooks said: 81 can't get it
out of my mind. My God, I will never
forget those eyes. His eyes looked more
like Koch's tnan anyone I know. | will
have to see him first before | can tell"
Witness denied making any such
statement. He denied making other sim
liar statements. He denied that Sheriff
Julius had asked him whether it was
not Koch and that he had refused to
reply.
Witness said that he had no impress
sions as to what the man was doing by
the motion of his arm. He saw his
hand Just as the man Strengthened up,
and the hand then closed | did not
see any instrument in his hand. Took
no notice of any blood on his hands.
Whatever else | saw than the eyes was
on the horizon of my vision | saw no
need for further investigation. Have
met J. E. Reynolds of Mankato, and
passed half dozen words with him.
Witness denied having mad certain
conversation with Mr.. Reynolds over the
telephone on Nov. End, relative to the
man he saw in the room He denied
having made any statements to one
Martin Penning. Both of these related
to the use of knife and the appear
ance of the murderer He would not
deny conversation with Wm B. Math-
or at New Ulm in the Boesch building,
bnt had no recollection of it. Denied a
conversation with Prof. E. L. Bills.
Had no conversation with DR.. G. f.
Reineke as quoted, and no conversation
with Mr.. Zelle. Witness denied con-
versation with Judge Webber and Court
Reporter w. T. Eckstein in front of
his office the morning after the homi-
eide. Brooks was quoted as saying to
Judge Weber that he had seen the
man before but could not place him, and
then as giving a detailed description of
the man, Knew Geo. W. Muffin, grain
dealer. Did not deny a conversation
with him on Sunday evening, Nov. 18th,
at a restaurant in Minneapolis, in which
he said that it might nave been Koch,
that he was not positive, but that he
knew Koch and did not see how he
could do it. Witness said he did not
deny a conversation with Judge Web
Der, only that some of the statements
quoted were not correct
"Had you ever published Il statement
in your paper, the New Ulm Review
that the man you saw was not George
r. KOch?" asked Gen Cnilds.
Il have not"
did you say to certain parties at the
coroner's inquest that you knew it was
not DR.. Koch because you did not see
the scar on the mans face?"
"No. sir"
"You base taken a pretty deep inter
est in the cause of the defense, haven't
you, Mr.. Brooks?"
Not umeasonably So"
Did you not go from the funeral to
Hoidae & Somsen's office?'
81 did"
Witness said that at that time he saw
an examination of Dr. Koch's hands
made. He was present during part of a
consultation with the attorneys named
and Mr.. Somerville and DR.. Koch. Do
not remember enough of the condition of
DR.. kOch's hands to testify. Gen. Childs
read from Mr.. Brooks testimony at
Henningsen's examination wherein he
described what he saw on the hands
quite infinitely. Witness admitted that
he had answered that the description of
the man seen by him more nearly an
sWered the description of DR.. Koch than
any otner man that he knew. Mr.
S0msen did not tell witness how he
should testify before the investigating
committee, Gen. Chids quoted from a
transcript of evidence in which Mr.
Brooks said that Somsen had told him
to be positive, but Brooks had replied
that he would state his own case and
would not be influenced by anybody. If
George was guilty he should be pun
ished, and if not he should not be, and
Somsen replied that this was so. Have
known Somsen ever since | came to
New Ulm.
Witness said that ne could not tell
who were present when they had rough
houses in Dr. Gebhard's offices. They
were gentlemen that we associated with.
On Redirect.
Mr. Somerville again asked for the
transcript of evidence taken at the Hen
ningsen hearing. He said that out of
fairness the state ought to turn it over,
but as it would not, he asked the court
to direct the state to turn it over.
Judge Cray said he thought that the
application should be denied, and it was.
On de-direct, Mr.. Brooks said that he
had gone from place to place as a Jour