Weekly Arizona journal-miner., 1905-05-24

three days to obtain treatment for a felon on the left hand. Documentary evidence was then brought out show ing Thomas had charged the county for some 70 days for caring for man by that name. Ii was a repetition of the evidence in the first trial, and was admitted, and explained by the court as simply eorrOborative evidence, having no direct beating on the testi- mony in this present hearing.
 R. II. Burmister briefly corrOborated the story told by Garner, who was and still is in his employ.
 The first witness for the defense was Clerk J. II. Robinson, who was made a defendant witness by Attorney Nor rison to bring out the fact that under his contract it is the duty of the eoun- ty physician to report all entrances to the county hospital, and the day of the dismissal of all patients sent to that institution. He presented all the reports of Dr. Fitzsimmons, then county physician, bearing on the case in question, covering nine months in 1903.
 The defendant then took the stand and after much preliminary testimony as to his duties and long term of office, was led to the matter of the Mexican girl, Refufa Durrama. He stated that during the time this girl was at the hospital he was very sick, and by or der of his physician kept out of doors whenever he was able to go out; that he came in late each evening, and left early next morning; that his wife and an old man, MT. Warner, since de- ceased, had managed the affairs of the hospital solely; that he had signed the reports, and bills made by his wife and Mir. Warner, taking for granted they were correct; that he did not know the Mexican girl by name, although he remembered her coming to the hOspi- tai. His testimony was similar to that given at his first trial, and was direct and plainly given. He explained that when a patient arrived at the hospital with a permit. Mir Warner received such patient. and turned the permit over to Mrs. Thomas. Upon this pa tient s leaving the hospital Mir. War ner reported same to Mrs. Thomas. who | kept list of arrivals and departures from which the monthly reports were made to the supervisors. He insisted i that so long as he had been strong and well no error had ever been made, and 1 that if there was an overcharge in the ease of the Mexican girl it was a simple error on the part of MT. War ner in getting names mixed. Despite a rigid cross-examinatiOn by Prosecutor Ellinwood, the testimony of Thomas was little shaken.
 Mrs. Thomas next took the stand and word for word endorsed and cor. roborated all her husband had testi fled to as to his sickness and her man agement of the hospital during the time he was unable to work. She made an excellent witness for the de fense, and at one period during hel turned to the jury, and with much testimony by Attorney Morrison, she feeling said:
 of there has been any stealing done in this, it is 1 who am to blanc and not my husband. for he had no thing to do with it at the time this girl was there. He was too sick"
 This simple statement seemed tC make a marked impression on the jury and under a strong fire of eross-exam ination, Mrs. Thomas bore up remark ably well, maintaing her well tol( evidence in every particular.
 Dr. Smith testified to having cared for Thomas during his illness, and tC having succeeded Dr. Barrett as county physician, the latter having gone tC