The morning journal-courier., 1907-12-31

WlC6 saw d ugnL III there dllu went in. He was working on the books, We had a short talk. Both times it was a little after o'clock.
 Regarding Regulations.
 Regarding the police regulations, Of ficer Stowell said that when complaint was received on the beat the officer was supposed to tend to it and report it on the book after getting back. It has not been the custom to report com plaints before attending to them. And considerable leeway is allowed a pa- trolman in leaving his beat in pursuing his duty.
 What the prosecution made consider able of was the fact that Stowell did not call up headquarters and ask for assistance He was asked if he was looking for assistance while walking toward Fredericks.
 T was, all the while looking along the street.
 Q. You passed several police boxes and did not telephone?"
 No. did not think it worth while.' The next question had reference to the immediate scene of action.
 What did you do in the shed?"
 q lighted two matches and looked around the she'd"
 After entering the store, why did you not close the door? Didn't you know that If there were any burglars inside they could get out. You had seen a shadow and thought somebody might be in there. Why did you not close the door? Did you want him to escape?"
 Stowell acknowledged that he had no reason for leaving the door open and then he was forced to listen to this.
 'sNo special reason! Yet you were looking for burglar, had searched the shed and left the door wide open That is your idea of how to catch a burg lar?' This last was objected to by Attorney FtzGerald, whose objection was sustained.
 Then the attorney asked if the detec- tives had not said, My God, this is Stowellw And he had said, "Let me go fellows; this will disgrace my fam ] fly. If I was young I could go west I have done nothing wrong"
 The attorney wanted to know why stowell was willing to go west if he had done nothing wrong. Stowell ex- plained that it was two men against one, and his only thought was that they were going to arrest him.
 Why did you not ask them to go with you and look around" was asked and the answer was: "As there were two men on the job, there was no use going further"
 Q. ..'When the officers stated that you pulled something out of your pocket that looked like keys, they were mistaken"
 IA. They must have been, as I did nothing of the kind"
 The failure of .dr. Frederick to rec ognize Officer Stowell was explained by the fact that he had shaved off his mustache since last summer, and had on a cap and tlght-fitting coat.
 Q. "Did you tell MT. Frederick that you were out on special duty?"
 A, q did not"
 Q. Did he not ask you who sent you over there?"
 A. q said that it was man whose name I could not recollect."
 This was the end of the cross exam nation. Attorney FitzGerald spent a few moments in redirect examination
 Other Witnesses.
 George Miller, 105 Morris street, testi- fed that he had waited at home for Brunt between and o'clock, but Brunt had not come.
 Sergeant Herman spent but a few minutes in the chair and as the state would not allow evidence as to Sto- wells reputation as an officer, ex-Chief Wrinn was not called.
 Frederick was brought to the stand, and Attorney FitzGerald in cross ex- animation sought to destroy the value of his evidence by securing from Fred erick the statement that he did not know whether his own memory was re- liable
 Cti9f Cowles, called as witness, ex- plained the conversation he had had with Brunt. stephen Brunt told him that the two suspicious characters he had seen were one about his size, the other shorter.
 Evidence as to the truth of Brunt was excluded as remote.
 Jules Waas, fl Judson avenue, who telephoned to Brunt at g o'clock on the Hateful night, repeated his previous testimony. His memory was tested by FitzGerald in cross-examination which lasted long enough to call forth pro- tes;.
 Here ended the taking of testimony.
 Simpson Sums Up.
 By graphic description, City Attorney Simpson pictured the approach of Of fcer Stowell in disguise to the Fred erick store, how he placed the key in the door, unlocked it, raised the latch and pushed the door open gently. The attorney claimed he did this for no other purpose than that of committing theft. Even without key, if he mere 1 ly raised the latch, claimed the attor- ney, he is guilty of burglary, or at least of attempted burglary, and should be bound over to the superior court,
 In going 8 mile off his beat for the purpose of experimenting supposed