The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1913-03-14

of trouble between the minister and
his first wife. Most of these witnesses
| denied knowledge of an action for
, divorce brought by his second wife
against the minister, and those who
admitted that they knew such an ac-
ton had been brought. denied knowl-
edge of the contents of the petition,
and denied knowing anything about
the facts alleged.
The dispositions were from "charac-
| ter witnesses, and referred for the
most part to the reputation borne by
the preacher where he lived for sew
eral years in Marion county, Ohio
In spite of the threatening weather
large crowd was on hand this morn
ing, and standing room was again more
or less at a premium. The crowd,
however, was not nearly so large to-
when it reached it's height The real
~ big crowd of the trial is expected
Monday morning when it is believed
likely the defendant himself will be
called to the stand to tell his own
story of the tragedy.
Black Was Tartar.
The state won a distinct victory
when Judge George H. Whitcom b
ruled that the evidence offered by
Attorney Harry Black of Triton, O.,
was admissible, and it made the best
of its victory by questioning the law
yer fully regarding conversation in
which the Rev. w. L. Beers, defend
ant in the murder case on trial, his
wife and the attorney took part nearly
five years ago.
On cross examination Black proved
to be match for his questioners. and
instead OF cross examining him all
| afternoon, as was expected, the de-
| Tense permitted him to go after half
an hours grilling. Even John Schenck
for the defense, known as rapid fire
! queStiOner on cross examination, gave
up an attempt to catch the Ohio man
mapping, and dropped his cross ex-
| animation.
Later E. G. Staley, another attorney,
who had been in the office at the time
| OF the conversation told by Black,
| took the stand and in measure re-
lterated the statements of the former.
| The state brought out, on direct ex-
animation, the fact that the presence
OF these two men is costing the coun-
ty $40 day apiece and their expenses.
But their evidence in the case was
deemed worth while.
Black said he is Catholic, and
was naturally incensed when he says
Beers made sighting remarks about
the Catholic religion. But Staley is a
Methodist, a member of the same
church of which Beers has been for
years local preacher, removing the
charge of church feeling from the
testimony given.
The hearing will continue today, but
it is believed likely that it will be con-
tinued when court adjourns tonight
until Monday morning. At that time,
or about that time, the defense ex-
poets to put the defendant on the
stand to testify in his own behalf, and
the interest in the case may then be
expected to reach fever pitch. How
long the examination of the defendant
may take is a matter of pure conjec-
ture A day or even more may be
devoted to a searching cross-exa NINA
ton, while the attorneys for the state
may feel justified in questioning him
only a short time and letting him go.
Tuesday night possibly, but far more
likely Wednesday night or Thursday,
it is hoped that the end--a verdict
may be reached. But it may be even
longer, as it probably will require a
full day for the arguments of six at
torneys who are taking part in the
trial, Otis Hungate, John J. Schenck
and Paul Heinz for the defense and
County Attorney William E. Atchison,
his first assistant, Thomas NJ. Lillard
and Judge R. F. Hayden for the state
Drawn. by Morbid Curiosity.
Packed into a space so small that |
it is undeniabIy uncomfortable, and |
standing for hours almost without mo-
ton except to shift from one tired foot |
to the other, scores of persons, the ma
jority of whom are drawn merely by |
the spectacle of man, and a minister
of the gospel, being tried for the most
serious offense against society in the |
est the progress of the hearing of the |
Rev. w. L. Beers in the second divis- |
ion of the district court.
1t is an appreciatiVe crowd. There |
are many who are ready to laugh at |
some witticism on the part of an at /
torney or witness. and some of the /
spectators are taking a keen interest |
in the fierce legal battle that is being |
fought. But for the most part the |
crowd is composed of the curious who, |
drawn by the gruesome features of |
the hearing, are content to put up with |
the discomforts attendant upon stand |
ing for hours in a surging crowd
Never but once before in the his
tory of the county has a court witness
ed such a gathering, and the present |
crowds even rival the former case
Nothing like it since the Collins |
case was tried" the old-timers tell one
another, when the gruesomeness of an
other hearing, wherein a man was
charged with patricide, brought the
idle out in numbers.
Among the crowd, too late to secure
a seat, a woman stood nearly all yes
terday afternoon with baby in her |
arms. Nobody thought of giving up |
his own seat to her, if indeed her fig
ure, which was almost lost in the
crowd that encompassed her. could be |
seen by those holding the few seats
Up in the balcony Mrs. Henry Moody,
who only few weeks ago sat Just
back of the attorneys for the defense
watching the trial of her own husband
1or murder, occupied seat, eagerly
the proceedings.
There are, probably three groups
represented. There are the friends of
the minister, and members of his
who have stood by him since
the trouble began, and who probably
arc genuinely interested in the OUT
come of the case. Then there are
those who have felt strongly for the
victim of the tragedy who are bitter
in denouncing the minister. The third
group, probably by far the largest, is
made up of the curious for whom the
magnet of a murder trial, especially
one surrounded by mystery and SEN