Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1907-04-29
THE GOLDEN CASE ON TRIAL.
WORK OF PROCURING A JURY
WAS VERY SLOW.
Several faIismen Are Challenged By The
Defense States Case Closed In An
IIOur...TO Prove An Alibi.
GREAT INTEREST CENTERED
ABOUT THE CASE.


Ellsworth Golden, was put ON trial
in the Circuit Court this morning on
the charge of assaulting with intent
TO kill upon Mrs. Blanche Davis by
shooting her with a shot gun lpon the
evening Of April IL. last. Mrs. Davis
was shot in the back while she had a
baby in her arms.
Mrs. Davis was in her house on the
outskirts of this city at the time and
the shot as fired through the window.
About thirty small shot took effect in
Mrs. Davis back and one entered the
| ankle of the child. Neither was SER
iously hurt. There was no witness of
the shooting so far as known and Mrs.
Davis was not able TO testify that
Golden did it. 1t was indicated by
Robert Moss, counsel for Golden, that
he defense would prove an alabi.
The case has excited more interest
than any trial that has taken place in
the local court for some time. Though
the matter was not brought out in
detail today. Mrs. Davis indicated
that Golden had assaulted her pre-
yious to the shooting and the theory
of the State is that he shot her in
order TO prevent her from telling her
husband what had occurred. 1t is
understood that Golden will be
brought 10 trial on this charge ais,
no matter how the present case termi-
mates.
The work of procuring the jury
took more than the usual time and
the regular panel of twent y-fiye jury
men was exhausted by the stime ten
men had been secured. Two tales
men were summoned but both were
challenged by the defense, and two
additional--A. G. Sweet and George
T.. II. King-were summoned and ac-
cepted. In all Robert Moss, counsel
for the defense, challenged fifteen
jurymen, thirteen of the regular panel,
and two extra talesmen, while State s
Attorney Green, who is conducting
the defense, challenged two. The
foreman of the jury is A. w. Stone.
The State closed its case in little
over an hour, the evidence being en-
tirely Of cireumstantial nature. Mrs.
Davis was the first witness and tes-
titled as to a number of threats which
Golden had made against her. She
said that he had been taken in the
house by herself and husband and had
paid no board, but done few chores.
She said that her husband was away
posed improper relations with her,
threatening to kill her if she did not
consent. She then stated that she had
written at once to her husband, urg-
ing him to come home to protect her.
A paper purporting to be this letter
was offered in evidence, but was re-
jected by divided court, Judge
Revell being in favor of admitting it
Tho
letter was offered later during the tes-
timony of James Stehle, who stated
| that he had received the letter by a
messenger from Mrs. Davis and had
read ii TO Mr.. Davis. 1t was again
refused by a divided court.
Mrs. Davis then stated that her
husband had returned on the after
noon of the shooting and that Golden
had left the house. She gave some
details of the shooting, which occurred d
later, but said that she could not
state who shot the gun. Mrs. Davis
was cross-examined by counsel for
| the defence and lit was brought out
that Golden had eaten supper in the
house with the two brothers of Mrs.
| Davis, aged % and Is years, respec-
| lively, after the time when Mrs. Davis
| testified Golden had made the pro-
posals and threatened her life.
Annie Diggs, a colored woman en-
ployed by James NJ. Munroe, gave
positive evidence that she had seen
Golden shortly before o'clock in
the vicinity of the Davis home with
| a double barrelled shot gun on his
shoulder, and this was confirmed by
| her son, Jesse Diggs. James Goodwin
ktestified that he had seen Golden be-
| tween or 8 o'clock going in the di-
rection of the latter's home. 1t is the
theory of the State that the first two
| witnesses saw Golden before the
shooting was done and that the latter
saw him afterwards.
The other witnesses for the State
were William Davis, husband of the
prosecuting witness, DIR. William S.
Welch, who attended her after the
shooting, and James Stehle. The State
closed its case shortly after noon.
Contrary TO expectation, the defense
offered no witnesses and agreed not to
address the jury. The jury remained
in the jury room for nearly an hour
and upon return gave a verdict of
guilty on the second count, assault
with intent to kill. 1t was rep orted
that at the beginning the jury stood
seven for acquittal and five for guilty
on the first tcount-assault with intent
to kill, and that the verdict was a
compromise.
1t was also explained that the jury
considered it aTpossibility that Col
den had fired the shot but at such a
distance to indicate that he had not
fired with the intention of killing
Mrs. Davis. The verdict was a sur
prise as it was generally thought that
Golden would be convicted OF the
more severe offence.
The penalty for assault with intent
to MAIN is from eighteen months to
ten years In the penitentiary. The
sentence was not imposed this after
noon before the adjournment of court.