The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1910-04-13
DEMONSTRATION
MADE AGAINST
THE WITNESS
William Russell's Eaigy Tram
pied Upon in Front Of His
Residence
WITNESS WHO CHANGED MIND
M0BbED AND DRAGGED N STREET

dence insufficient to Establish For.
geries ON the Part Of the Respon.
dents.
Melrose, Mass, April 13.-This city
last night was in a riotous uproar
following the decision adverse to the
North Dakota claimant in the Russell
will case. "A crowd, numbering about
1000 persons, visited the homes Of
people who testified against the Dick
inson man in the sensational trial
just closed and in one case violence
resulted.
At the Russell estate, the home Of
William G. Russell, who has alone en-
joyed the great estate since the death
Of his father. an efiigy was first trod-
den upon, then dragged and later at
tached to tree and set afire.
The small force of policemen in the
city was unable to cope with the
crowd and no arrests were made.
1t was at the home of James r.
AFFORD, who, after testifying against
Dakota Dan," subsequently recog-
nized Fresno Dan," the second claim
ant, as the real Daniel Blake Russell,
that blows resulted.
The crowd, among whom were at
least 100 women, swarmed before the
AFFORD house and Kissed and hooted.
While number were rushing up the
steps to the piazza, a brick was
thrown through q window into the
house.
Mr.. AFFORD, .brandishing golf club
ran out, threatening all with whom
he came in contact. In the melee, a
number fell, whereupon the crowd be-
came furious and AFFORD was grasped
roughly, thrown to the ground and
jumped upon. Then he was dragged
some distance down the street.
The crowd eventually dispersed
without further trouble.
Grounds of Decision. F.
On arriving at this decision, which
is tantamount to the announcement
that he considers the claimant an i'm
postor. Judge Lawton found particu-
lar Significance in the testimony of
the Ruseau family that the petitioner
was their relative, who has been miss
ing from his home in northern New
York since 1885.
Expert Evidence insufficient.
The expert testimony for the petit
tioner, he said, could not be consider
ed as sufficient evidence to establish
the grave charges Of forgery, because
cancellation stamping and erasure in
the disputed Ruseau exhibit, which
had been advanced by the claimants
counsel to prove thae the North Da-
kota claimant had been the victim Of
a gigantic conspiracy.
According to the opinion of Judge
Lawton it was utterly incredible that
such a conspiracy, involving not only
the witnesses who had testified for
the respondent, but the legal repre-
sentative Of the defenders of the Rus
sell estate, had been made. In this
connection Judge Lawton took oc-
casion to justify the attitude of the
respondents counsel and in particu-
lar that of Eugene c. Upton, who has
been the subject of persistent attack
by Senator Simpson. The evidence
showed, he said, that Mr.. Upton was
freed Of any aspersions against his
good name and of any wrong doing
in the handling of the case in court or
his advice as to the administration of
the estate.
Prosecution Unlikely.
United States Attorney Asa p.
French when asked whether criminal
action in the United States court is
likely to ensue from the developments
in the Russell case said that If any
reliable evidence should be placed be-
fore him which indicated that fed
eral offense had been committed he
would consider 1t carefully. He de-
clined to comment further regarding
Some Opinions.
Here are some opinions of the de-
cision from these interested in the
case:
Hattie May Keith, sweetheart of the
true Daniel Blake Russell said:
mot all the juries nor the judges
In the world can ever make me loose
faith in this claimant. l still believe
and even II everybody turns against
him. that he is still my old sweet
heart. Daniel Blake RUSSELL"
NcAsou Ia SHelUOn, OF counsel Tor
the claimant declared:
This fight has barely begun. You
may say 1t is merely q preliminary
skirmish. The big battle will be
fought in the supreme court"
The wife of the claimant made this
statement:
This decision by Judge Lawton
makes me q woman without a name.
He ruled that my husband is not Dan
iel Blake Russell. but he did not say
who he was. Consequently as l am
the claimants wife, either my hus-
band or myself hae not now any rec
ognized legal name.
I'm spite of Judge Lawton's ruling,
assert that my husband is the real
Daniel Blake Russell. l know he is
Dan Russell, and he will prove It.