Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-07-09
ALL AGAINST ORCHARD
Deposition as to the Wrecking
of Bradley's House.
DlSCREDIT THE BOMB STORY
A Bare Possibility That It Might
Prove True.
VICTIM ADMITS SOME DOUBT
Gas Company Mulcted of $4,000 Now
Hopes It May Get It
Back.
]lSCREDIT THE BOMB STORY
VICTIM ADMITS SOME DOUBT

BOISE, ldahO, July S.-Ine reaulnB Oh
the dispositions taken in San Francisco in
connection with the explosion at the resi-
dence of Fred Bradley. whom Orchard
swears he twice attempted to assassinate
continued today as one of the closing fea-
lures on the side Of the defense.
BY the state the Bradley incident is
looked upon as one Of the most important
features of it's case in support Of the
Orchard story. The defense has all along
maintained that the attempt to poison
Bradley and his whole household and the
explosion at the house which Orchard says
was caused by bomb placed by him are
fabrication. Orchard says that he was
commissioned by Haywood to go to San
Francisco and kill Bradley, who had been
a consistent enemy to organized labor. He
swore that he first poisoned the milk with
arsenic. and, failing in this placed bomb
under Bradley's front door mat with
string attached to the door handle. 1t
was. according to Orchard, one of the
bombs invented by Pettibone. At the time
given by Orchard an explosion occurred
at the Bradley house just as Bradley Kim
self was coming out of the house smoking
cigar. Bradley was terribly mangled,
but recovered, and the front porch Of the
house was badly damaged Shortly after
the explosion the owner of the house sued
the gas company for damages and got
Judgment because of an escape of gas
which, it was claimed, caused the explo-
sion. Then came the Orchard confession
and an appeal was taken against the judg-
ment, but the higher court sustained the
lower court.
Is Possible Story.
When the case against Haywood came up
a commission was appointed to go to San
Francisco and take dispositions.
Fred Miller for the defense. and Mr..
Vanduyn of the prosecution were selected.
The dispositions are lengthy and the whole
of the two sessions today probably will be
taken up in the reading.
Bradley still maintains his first position
tina. the explosion was caused by gas; but
he modified his positive claim that he says
the theory of a bomb is possible. He does
not deny that the milk was poisoned.
All of the witnesses far examined I'M
der the dispositions. however, have admitted
that the main features of Orchards account
are within the bounds of possibility. Or
chard says that the bomb was placed under
the door mat and Bradley says that his
face was filled with the particles from the
mat and with glass from the door. 1t is
not likely now that Meyer will go on the
stand before tomorrow. His testimony Will
probably take one day, and Thursday Hay
wood will be called. His examination prob
ably will take UP the remainder of the
week, and the states rebuttal is hardly
looked for before next Monday.
The Days Session.
The Steunenberg trial recommended at
$50 this morning. when the read ng OF the
San Francisco dispositions was continued
Senator Borah was indisposed and unable
to be in attendance at the trial this morn
ing.
With the prospect that another full day
would have to be given over to the reading
of the San Francisco dispositions covering
the explosions at the apartments Of Fred
w. Bradley, in November 1904, there were
few spectators in court this morning
The day began with continuance Of the
testimony of J. b. Reilly, who lived near
the Bradley apartments. Reilly declared
he had passed the apartment house but a
few minutes before the explosion and saw
a Japanese servant cleaning the stoop and
vestibule. He did not believe 1t was within
the range of possibility for any one to have
placed bomb there in the manner indicated
ny OIcudfu al lllc TIME WHICH elapsed De-
tween his passing and the report of the ex-
ploSion. Orchard testified that after pIac-
ing the bomb he boarded a street car and
got out Of hearing before the explosion oc-
cured
The next deposition taken up was that
Of Mrs Charles Packard, who, as Mrs
Crow. had been employed by the Brad
leys as cook. She told of having smel!ed
gas in the house for several DAYS prior to
the explosion. and had called up the gas
company to complain of it.
Mrs. Crow denied absolutely that she had
gone to the theater with Orchard as he tes-
titled. She declared that he told a false
hood when he testified to that effect
He Smelled Gas.
The witness declared the explosion was
more like thud than a sharp report.
Attorney barrow next took up the dep
osition of Mrs. Lucy A. Cummings. who
occupied one Of the flats in the building
with the Bradleys. She described the ex
plosion as the most terrible noise she had
ever heard in her life. The witness and
her husband were at breakfast at the time
and both jumped to their feet, exclaiming.
It's gas"'
Gas had been leaking about the house for
some time. Asked If she heard one or two
explosions Mrs. Cummings said there was
just 'one big noiseI" Rushing into the
hall. she smelled gas but no power. The
witness did not know, however. whether
powder or not.
Testimony Of Firemen.
Mrs Josephine Linforth wife of the