New Ulm review., 1905-01-18

found in the inquiry, which will nn-
doubtedly be put to the jurors, viz:
Could DR.. Koch, who was seen in
front of the barber shop Immediately
before the crime, wearing the clothing
described, have thrown aside his over
coat and stiff hat, donned slouch
hat and then committed the murder?
Who ever perpetrated the dastardly
deed jumped out of the rear window
How then could DR.. Koch have re
gained in possession of his hat and
oyercoat in which he appeared on the
street the next morning?
These questions appeal strongly to-
Koch's friends. He could not, it will
be urged, have placed these articles in
the alley after he passed the barber
shop, this testimony shows, that some
one was heard walking heavily up the
stairs, leading to DR.. Gebhardt's
Office.
The proceedings of the afternoon
had been tame, the witnesses being
excused without cross examination
and interest was growing listless when
the name of e. G. Koch was called by
the bailiff.
I The first business of the defense
after the opening of the case by Mr..
Somerville, was to call witnesses for
the purpose Of impeaching the state S
witness, Dingler, for this purpose six
witnesses were examined and at the
conclusiin of their testimony it was
very evident that the defense had sue
ceeded in its undertaking and that the
evidence of the hammer would have
little weight with the jury.
The defense introduced other wit
nesses on Friday who testified they
had seen a similar hammer in the
/ possession of DR.. Gebhardt and still
other witnesses who identified the
hammer as one they had owned for
many years and had purchased in
Fairmont, SO it appears that so many
different identifcations of the ham
mer have been made that very little
weight can be given to the connection
1 it has with the defense.
! MOST PATHETIC SPECTACLE.
Then followed the most pathetic
spectacle ever witnessed in the Brown
county court house.
The aged father of the man en- trial
for his life moved slowly toward the
witness chair amid solemn stiffness.
/ The lawyers on both sides drew closer
together, the jurors leaned forward
i and the curious crowd listened
breathlessly.
It was certain thatthe young dentist
! alibi would be attacked and from the
first to the last question put to the
4 venerable witness it was clear that his
!. testimony was all important.
i On direct examination, ex the witness
testified clearly and directly regarding
1 his sons alibi. He said George
:
i first, at twenty two minutes of ter
d O'Clock and this statement he adhered
4 to throughout, a considerate, bu'
nevertheless searching, cross-exami
& nation, conducted by General Childs
1 Asked how he was so sure of the
4 time, he stated that on the Saturday
night before the murder, he had chidee
George for coming home late atnight
When, therefore, George came in be
fore ten O'Clock Tuesday night, 1.-THE
night OF the murder), he noticed tn,
time in particular.
4 After George had been in the hous.
a very short time, he went out to ge
some shells in the hope of shooting !;
rabbit he had seen on his way home
4 He was gone about two or thre,
minutes. He came back, picked up
q magazine or book, sat near th,
witness for a half hour and then wen
after an apple in the cellar.
OLD MAN BECOMES MIXED.
A plat of the Koch home was show
+ to the jury and a part Of the witness
: testimony was given before the juror
, with the plat before them.
q On cross-ex animation Mr.. Koch wa
4 unable to remember the time at whic
s George arrived home, after hay
ing. been admonished to get in earle
to spend more of his time at home
He was only absolutely clear an
! positive, regarding Tuesday night th
I night of the murder.
+ Gen. Childs was persistent, br
j kindly in his interrogatories, an
only once reused the ire of the age
! witness.
Did yon have a talk with Anto
: Richartz on November %. 1904, o