The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-07-15
States Star Witness in the
Trial of Haywood
Is Again Put on the Stand in
Rebuttal.
FEW QUESTIONS ASKED
The Defense on Cross -Examina-
tiOn Brought Out the Fact
That His Uncle Was Crazy and
Hanged Himself.

chard, the principal witness for the
state against w. D. Haywood, was
called in rebuttal this morning when
the trial of the secretary of the West
ern Federation of Miners was re-
sumed. Orchard was in the chair
about 20 minutes. The questions of
the state were few and In less than
five minutes Orchard was turned over
for cross examination.
E. T. Richardson, cross examining,
brought out a new feature when he
asked if Orchards maternal grand
father was not insane on the subject
of confessing imaginary crimes. Or
chard admitted that his uncle, Peter
Mckinney, who lived in Northumber
land county, Ontario, had hanged him.
self while insane. He denied all
knowledge of a grandfather named
Patrick This cross examination was
based on a letter received by the de-
fense from B. w. McKinstry of Ala
media, Pa. The writer claimed that
he received the information from Mrs.
Margaret Bull of Ontario, who was
neighbor of Patrick Mckinney, the
grandfather of Harry Orchard. She
said Patrick Mckinney was IAN old
style country gentleman but he be-
came insane and raved of crimes he
had committed in Ireland, as a result
his family kept him chained for
years. OICAdIQ dpPSdACQ q AeNAO
paler than when on the stand in di-
rect cross examination. but he showed
the same quiet self possession.
William Dewey, the witness who
made confession Saturday, and other
witnesses in rebuttal testified briefly.
In the last half hour of the morning
session, rebuttal on the claim of a con-
spiracy against the Western Federation
of Miners among the Citizens Alliance,
the Mine Owners association and de-
tectives in Colorado, an interesting
verbal duel occurred when Richardson,
for the defense. took E. L. Sabin,
lawyer of Idaho Springs. Colo, in
hand for cross examination. Richard
son and Sabins were engaged in the
trial of cases in Colorado. in 1903,
Richardson defended and -Sabin prose-
cuted-
Testimony in Detail.
Boise, Idaho, July 15-When the
Haywood trial was resumed this
morning Judge Wood announced that
he had decided to sustain the objec-
ton of the records of the state insane
asylum, showing the committme ent to
that institution of John D. Elliott, who
as a witness for the defense testified to
a long conversation which he said he
had with Harry Orchard in November,
1905. The court cited a statute which |
provides that insane persons shall not
be accepted as witnesses. Apparently |
the prosecuting attorneys knew of
Elliott's commitment when he ap-
have objected to his testimony at that
time.
William Dewey. the witness who
startled the court room on Saturday |
by confessing to participation in the |
Occur G'Alene riots and the attack on |
the Bunker Hill and Sullivan mill, |
was recalled to further identify w. F. |
Davis as the man who handed out |
guns and ammunition the day the |
mob started for the mill.
The defense took advantage of |
Dewey's temperance to question him |
further as to his motive for testifying |
at this time. Dewey denied that he |
had been allowed to go in debt to the |
amount of $500 to the union store at |
Cripple Greek through the leniency of |
Davis.
Didn't Davis finally deny further
credit to you and wasn't it then that |
you left the union?" asked Attorney |
Richardson.
mo. sir
Still Owes the Union.
Dewey admitted that he still owed |
the store. He said he had never been |
refused credit by any one. /
Didn't you after testifying on Sat
urday say TO the man who accom-
panied you down town that you knew |
the names of at least 200 of the men
who went to the Bunker Hill and Sui
livan mill, but you would be if |
you would tell that lawyer fellow?"
QenanQeQ fk1cn9rOSOn-
mo, sir
The witness declared he could re-
member no such conversation. Neither
could he remember just what was
discussed.
Lawrence Guibbini, the San Fran
cisco F~ocer. who lived across the street
from the Bradley apartment house.
was recalled to deny that he served a
drink to man named Reilly the
morning of the Bradley explosion.
Reilly. who appeared as a witness for
the defense. declared Guibbini and
his wife had served him a drink Mrs
Guibbini also took the stand and de-
MED what Reilly had said. On cross
examination Guibbini said he had re-
ceived 1925 as travelling expenses for
returning to Boise from San Francisco.
The state continued further to rebuilt |
as to the Bradley explosion.
Charles Wayne. who lived next door
to Governor Steunenberg, was called
to testify as to the position in which
the governor was found after the Or
chard bomb had exploded the purpose
being to show similarity in the effect
on Bradley and Steunenberg
An Objection Sustained.
The attorneys for the defense OBJ
jected TO this testimony as not proner
rebuttal. arguing that the subject
should have been gone into as a part
of the direct case. The objection ives
sustained and the witness withdrau-D II
c. d. Lanson of the Boise Gaslight
company, next was called as a gas ex-
pert to rebuilt the theory of the defense
that Bradley explosion was caused by
gas. the ignition having been through ,
a lighted cigar Lanson declared in
positive terms that gas would not |
ignite from any glow such as that in
m lighted cigar. He said flame tenn