Arizona republican., 1905-02-01

The case was set for 10 o'clock but at that time the agent had not secured legal counsel and continuance was taken until 7 in the afternoon to give him time to do so. He was represent ed by Bennett and Bennett Half the hearing was taken up with the argu- nent of law points. The application Tor the writ was based mainly on the ground that the prisoner was not Ed McClain. the person named in the re- Qulsltion and in the warrant of extra- 1 ditloN. The argument therefore turn ed on the propriety of a hearfna for the esta tabIshment of the identity of the prisoner. The attorneys for the agent co1tended that that should be done in Iowa unless it should be claimed that the prisoner was not the person named in the executive warrant Of Governor BroGie. That point having been set tied against the prisoner the hearing Of testimony was begun.
 The first witness was Barnett. the partner of Belmont or McClain, and his testimony explained among other things why the prisoner had been sometimes called Barnett. Barnett said he had known Belmont since he was about nine years old. The father oi the witness was a planter in Texas. The father of Belmont rented some land of him, put in q crop and died leaving his son alone in the world The father of the witness took charge of him and raised him. The witness and the prisoner saw a great deal of each other until they were past tWenty-Onc years old when they separated. The witness said that he went to Califor- mia and went into the box making lrra
 making boxes fer J. II. FIicking &- co. of San Jose. About three years ago he received a letter from Belmont with whom he had kept up a correspondence asking him if he could find something for him to do: his wife was in ill health and it vas necessary to take her to mildeT climate. The witness sent for Belmont and his wife. He tried to get Belmont into the box making business but he seemed iucap- able of learning it and then he procur- ed him a situation in the liquor house of Long and LawIe-. San Francisco.
 on June 2S of last year the witness said Ee left san Francisco with the notion of looking up location for a saloon and took Belmont with him. Mrs. Belmont had been previously sent back to her friends iu Omaha The
 h .N. the City of Mexico, returned to the United States and visited many points. among them. Omaha where Belmont went to see his wife. They were at no time in the state of Iowa and it was within this time that the crime of which Belmont is accused occurred.
 They finally reached POcateIlo, Idaho. and while there Belmont arrang- ed for his wife who had grown worse to come to Phoenix and they decided to join her here. The cross examination brought out that they had been ar rested at various places on suspicion, the last arrest being at Pueblo.
 Barnett was a remarkable witness iupreEuahle against all attempts to CoufoUnd him. Notwithstanding the wide range of the journey Of him and the prisoner ne told of it always the same way. While he was at all times consistent the impression that he and Belmont were a dangerous pair and were travelling about the country for evil purposes, was unavoidable.
 w. $. Foster was another witness. He knew Belmont and Barnett in Texas and so corrobo-ated the story of Far nett as to their early boyLood.
 There was q pathetic and almost tra- sic incident in the proceedings. The wife Of Belmont lay dying at the Sis tcrs hospital and in the course of the hearing it was reported that she Was dead. She had sent a dying statement iu behalf of her husband. She told of his visits to her in her sickness and of the letters she had received from him. SEc knew from these visits and