Evening journal., 1911-06-28

livery window and Of following her to
No 705 French street.
John W. Mitchell. Deputy United
States Marshal. told of assisting in
the arrest and Of the defendant deny
ing that her name was Lambert
Mrs. Twilley. who resided in the
house. said that was her name. and
he made the arrest. Later he went
to her rooms, at No. 7O5 French
street. where a suit case was found
The case and it's contents. surgical
instruments. were Identified
Wilmer Hahn, special policeman,
was called and told Of assisting In
spector Plummer in searching the
room and the finding Of letters.
Mrs wilhelmina Twilley said the
defendant secured rooms at her
boarding house. No. 2O5 East Fifth
street. in April She had many callers.
mostly women. and they went TO the
parlor. but three Of them did stay
over night At times she would 90
away and then her mail was taken
by the witness to No 705 French
street, where It was TO he delivered
to her son, Jack. The witness did
not know his last name.
Mrs. Twilley said she knew the
\ handwriting Of the defendant, having
received postal cards from her Let
ters we're then given to her and she
identified them.
The witness said that on the day
the arrest was made, the defendant
said Il am arrested I am not Mrs.
Lambert" The witness said she de-
clared that she knew her by no other
name. Asked by the District Attorney
II she had ever seen the suit case. Mrs
Twilley said she had seen It in the
back room Of her second floor. used
by Mrs Lambert
During cross-examination Attorney
Salisbury asked the witness II she
knew whose handwriting was on
piece OF paper Attorney Nields OBJ
jected. stating that he wanted to show
that it was not the defendants hand
writing. The objection was sustained
Mr. Salisbury asked Mrs. Twilley II
she had not asked Mrs. Lambert at
\ Fifth and King streets on May 10, TO
mail the letter This was denied by
the witnessed.
Miss Minnie Adams. boarder at
the East Fifth street house, testified
she saw the defendant with the suit
case.
Suit Case Of instruments.
Mrs J. Clayton, wife Of the foster
son Of the defendant was called and
testified that the case was owned by
her but the contents, surgical instru-
ments, we're owned by Mrs. Ashmead
meaning the defendant
The defendants attorney objected o
the admission Of the case and instrn-
ments as the ownership was not ds-
termined. but the court admitted them.
Or Samuel G. Rumford Identified the
instruments as those used by. physi-
clans and he was OF the opinion they
had been used lately
!. The Government then closed It's side.
and Attorney Salisbury said he would
prove that the letters we're not written
by the defendant but she had been
asked to mail them for another party
Mrs. Ashmead on Stand.
Mrs Ashmead was called 10 the Wit
ness stand and the various letters re-
ceived by Inspector Plummer were
shown 10 her She said she did see
them before And when the last letter
was shown she said Mrs. Twilley gave
IL to her at No. 205 South Twelfth
street She corrected herself. wiping
away her tears, saying in East Fifth
street
She testified that during the con-
versation with Plummer she offered no
information. but the door had been
opened twice. as n some one was hear
ing the conversation. And when she
reached the door she met the men.
} and her arrest followed.
She said the instruments in the suit
case we're owned by a Or. Stevenson,
whose boarding house she bought out
/, In Philadelphia, and she intended 70
} send them TO Pittsburg where be is At
present
Tho reason she came to Wilmington
was 10 canvass for device Of her own
patent
Bought boarding House.
Mrs. Ashmead stated that the letters
found in her room. No. 705 French
street. we're given TO her by Mrs
: Twilley 10 mail TO a DR.. Reese. and
she had not done so. II was brought
out that when she purchased a board
ing house from Dr. Stevenson, Of
: Forty-frst and Lancaster avenue
; Philadelphia, she had a large lot OF
medical instruments, medicine and
the like and these we're sent TO her
home in Millville. n. j., when she re-
sided there.
: In cross-examination. the defendant
{ said a suit case offered in evidence
was not one used IN canvasing and
! those who claimed TO have seen it
Z were telling untruths
She was then asked by the district
. attorney n she was not convicted OF
{ similar charge in 1909. The de-
fendant was informed by Judge Brad
ford that she did not have 10 answer
unless she wanted to. She did no
answer A recess was taken unit
230 o'clock.