Weekly journal-miner., 1915-04-28

tore instructions can be gwen to the jury. Both sides are confident of winning and are fighting for every ad- vantage that they may gain or every setback they may give their adver- saries.
 At the opening of the trial ycster- day Frank Clinesmith, witness of the day before, was recalled to the stand by the defense for cross-exam' ination, during which it was brought out by his testimony that Clarence Echard, a blacksmith, working at Clark's mine, near the Slate creek road upon which Clinesmith worked sharpened nearly all the steel tools used by the county men working on the Slate creek road. This is one of the points that the defense tried to bring out the day before but could not because of the persistent objec- tions by the county attorney. The idea in bringing this point before the jury was to prove that while Cline smith was working ill the mine and being paid by the county, Echard who worked in the mine and was be- ing paid by Clark, was doing work equal in value for the county to that of Clinesmith's in Clark's mine.
 Further in his testimony Cline smith said that cut through nearly solid rock 156 feet deep and 140 feet long was made on the road and that it required lot of steel sharpening the majority of which was done by Echard.
 After Clinesmith's testimony, Will liam Stephens, chairman of the board of supervisors, also a witness of the lay before, was recalled to the stand 5y the prosecution and he testified hat during the spring of 1912 when he board of supervisors found out that the cooks in Clark'5 boarding houses for the men on the roads were being paid by the county through Clark, they told Clark that hereafter he would have to pay for his own cooks, and they discovered that later lbout June, 1914, that despite theii warnings, Clark was paying his cooks with the ceunty's money oi rather he was charging the county with the cooks time. Attorney An lerson after this testimony said: "Wt expect to prove that cooks have beer paid by the county, were paid by tho county during Clark's time as roac superintendent and that the county right now is paying cooks at roac camps and the supervisors and coun y attorney knew it and know | now," Judge Cooper in answer said
 the defense will only be allowed tc
 enter into the evidence testimony which would prove that the supervis DTS knew they were paying cooks af ter they had notified Clark and no before notifying Clark or after hi: discharge"
 When croSs-examined by Attorney Clark, Stephens testified that tho county furnished camp outfits fol most of the road gangs and they were all in charge of Clark. He anC other members of the board of super visors occasionally visited the roac camps, the larger ones twice a montl but he had never visited the one a Slate creek He said he had cater meals at times when he visited them When asked by Clark if he had evei raid for any of the meals, O'Sullivar objected and he was sustained by tht | court. Clark then addressed tht court saying: "We arc trying tC | prove that after June, 1914, all cool outfits belonging to Clark, supplies stoves and so forth, that were con hscated arc still being used by tht county and that Clark has asked fol his property time and again, but i was never given to him and we wan 10 prove it by this witness" Int court ruled in favor of the prosecu ton, saying that the defense would not be allowed to ask such questions