The Ward County independent. [volume] (Minot, Ward County, N.D.) 1902-1965, 1906-02-01
MURPHY CASE DRAWING
TOWARDS A CLOSE
Defense Has Rested and State Engaged in Rebutta---
Much Handwriting Testimony Rebutta| viii be Long
and Case win Not Go to Jury TIL Middle Of Next
Week---The State Has a Strong Case

state to subpoena McAllister, who, he
think he can be fixed" When the state
called this witness they were met with .
storm OF objections, which occupied the
overruled. McAllister testified that he
had never signed or authorized the sign
ing Of any receipt except one for 5000,
for e377.4O. McAllister said that he had
received 9167. SO from Murphy, but had
never been asked for or given any 70.
ceipt except the first one for $50 co. sign
ed when Murphy tilst asked him to do
the road work. Murphy acknowledged
that the receipt had been changed
slightly, saying that it had turned out
that there was mistake in the amount
due and it had been altered accordingly,
but denied that il sNa4 originally signed
for anything ike 10 smsll IN amount as
5000 Tbs dsSsnso,w went into detail in
regard to the way IN (which McAllister
received the 0167 81, aud succeeded in
showing that he had made some mis-
takes a. q; details; but the sum received
still fSUtedf,lp@ to only. S172 50, ard the
stats by another witness explained the
mistake; and made out the amount to be
Sl67 80 after all Slatky did not know
whetherisor not ho signed the receipt
GexTingF his name, but was sure that il
be did SO it was Under misapprehen-
sion as to what he was signing, and tes.
tilted that he! had never received any
money from Murphy for railroad road
taxes that year. Mrs. Will Dickman,
the wife Of the road overseer of Carter
township, testified that her husband was
not away from home at the time that
Murphy testified that he met him in
Minot and made an arrangement with
him to work out the taxes in his district.
Harry Hardy testified that, long time
after Murphy said he had Crowder's
place near Ross pointed out to him by
McAnenany, Murphy got to talking with
him and asked him particularly where
Crowder lived. Various other witnesses
gave evidence tending to show that Muir
ply had not explained the charges
| against him in the way he now does
when first confronted with them. Among
these was G. A. Jones, OF the Optic, who
testified as to statement which the
Major requested him to print shortly
after the preliminary hearing.
| A surprise was sprung when, on Wed
} nesday afternoon of this week, the state
! put on the stand Il handwriting expert,
and started to question him as to the
! signatures in question. The defense
here put up as strenuous tight As at
any time since the trial began. The evi
dencc was admitted. and the expert tes-
| titled that in his opinion the $ gnature
sc. e. +. Gordon on the EeSIacs road
receipt Of 1904. was not written by Mr.
Gordon, one OF whose admittedly genu-
iue signatures WAS admitted in evidence.
Mr.. Gordon is now dead. and for that
reason the evidence as to his transaction
was confined to few leading facts. The
expert. being asked about the signatures
to the Hardy and Crowder receipts, the
former of which Murphy admits writing
and the latter Of which he says was
written either by him or under his di-
rection, testified tina, III his opinion
these were both written by the Major
and in disguised hand. He gave his
reasons for SO thinking at length, and
used a powerful magnifying glass
These signatures. according to him
were written slowly, and bear MARKS in
places of having been re-traced. This
witness is still on the stand at tn. houl
OF writing,