Arizona republican., 1905-04-21

sion between the interpreter and the district attorney regarding the Spanish language and literature of the tongue of Cervantes. in the course of which the district attorney told the interpre- ter that he had much to learn about Castilian.
 The testimony of the first witness practically told the story of the killing 1t was supported with slight contradic- tons by the other witnesses for the prosecution. For instance one witness said that Salazar had no lantern when he emerged from the tent saloon. An ather witness said that after the kill ing there was a lantern near the com missary tent Another who appeared immediately after the shooting said that there was no lantern.
 One of the witnesses was R. Baca who said that he was sleeping when the shot awoke him and he sat on the side Of the bed putting on his shoes when another witness Chaves came and told him that Salazar had been killed. Cha veg had testified that Baca was asleep after the shooting and that he had aroused him. None of these discrepan- cies were however regarded as i'm pOrtant
 mad been drinking before the shooting but that neither of them was drunk At the close he said that he had taken a drink with Lucero and Salazar at the tent saloon sometime before the shoot ing.
 Most of the witnesses were question ed regarding the motive and most of them in support of the theory of the prosecution replied that there had been some dissatisfaction regarding the way | Salazar had been keeping the books. At the conclusion of the testimony 1 for the defense Captain Alexander took | the stand to introduce a diagram he l had made of the locality of the shoot ing. He had recently visited it in com pany with the wife and daughter of Lucero and Gadalbon one of the wit l nesses for the defense. They had point 1 ed out to him the locations of the var
 ious tents in the camp and he had step ped of the distances between them and i had fixed the directions by his eye. The | prosecution objected to the admission
 of the diagram on the ground that it i had been made on hearsay testimony and that beside it was not pretended l that it was accurate. The court decid- l ed to let it go in for what it was worth and let the jury determine the worth
 of it.
 MT Alexander was asked if he was a l professional draftsman. He replied I that he had spent two years in the of i fee of the city engineer of Los An 1 geles.
 In the course of his testimony the witness stated that he had been ap- l pointed by the court to defend Lucero.
 He was asked if he had not ,been em- ] ployed by Lucero to defend him. He
 replied that at the beginning he had l been so employed but that he had never 1 received any money. He appeared at l the preliminary examination as the i hired attorney and also before the l grand jury After the. indictment he
 said he had been asked by the court
 to defend Lucero inasmuch as he had
 already taken up the case. He re- | iterated that he had never received any money and the promises which Lucero
 had made him were so vague that no
 money was ever expected.
 This was the last testimony of the
 day. The attorneys for the defense
 announced that they could put in their
 evidence in an hour or at the most in
 an hour and a half It is therefore
 probable that the case will go to the
 jury today.