South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1921-04-02
|HULTZ ALONE
TESTIFIES FOR
T HIS ACQUITTAL
|fense Springs Surprise by
Closing Case After Lone
Witness Heard.

bNTINUED FROM PAGE oNE)
b that he took the clothes to Hol-
a. Mich.
chuitz admitted having been told
Danruther and Wright Of their
n 10 rob either the Muessel or
osier Cream brewery. but he de-
d that he participated in the
hessel brewery holdup and muir
J. He also denied the statement
his wife, Mrs. Stella Schultz. that
had choked her and threatened
life IL she told what she had
ard during a conversation that
r.. Schultz testified her husband
d Wright held at the Schultz home
ortly after the murder. The de-
ndant said that no conversation
tween himself and Wright was
Id within hearing OF Mrs. Schultz
Immediately following the return of
fright to the Schultz home after
Q murder. z
Deuies wife's Testimony.
According TO the defendant, any
Snversation between the two men
as held in Wrights room unstairs
! the Schultz homo at 100 w. La
Lille av. The defendant also de-
! ed his wife's testimony that she
jirned the bundle OF clothing the
light OF the murder. Schultz said
bat ne and Wright took the bundle
, the basement and put IL in the
lrnace. The defendant said that
10 came down stairs a little ahead
y Wright TO see that there was no
|ne there TO see what they were do
BIZ.
Schultz also denied the testimc ny
II his wife that he had left the
|chultz home on either the after
loon preceding the murder or on
he afternoon OF the day the crime
Fas committed. The defendant said
hat he was home both afternoons,
nd that on the afternoon OF the
ay OF the murder that he instead
Z his wife prepared the supper. lie
estified that he prepared a Swiss
teak instead OF his wife preparing
ork for the evening meal, as Mrs
chultz testified she did.
The defendant denied that he had
in the holdnp at the
fuessel brewery and in the murder
Z Muessel and ChrObot, although
% admitted on cross examination
hat he had discussed the robb~fy
Z the Muessel brewery with Dan
luther and Wright during a walk
he three men took prior TO the
rime. Schultz was not clear as TO
ust when this walk was taken ex-
opt that 1t was before the murder
ook place.
Atty. Schwartz asked the defend
mt to identify a rope as the clothes
ne used by Danruther and Wright
{ the Muessel robbery and the alb
ence OF which from the Schults
Iome was commented upon by Mrs.
chultz a few days after the muir
Ter. The defendant said that the
ope offered him for Identification
esembied his wife's clothesline.
Defence Springs Surprise.
Two pieces of yellow cloth ~ffered
~ the prosecution on cross exami-
lation were identified by the de-
endant as the raincoatS worn by
and Wright. The pieces
4 cloth, however, developed to be
merely parts OF raincoats.
The action OF the defense IN
esting it's case Immediately after
he state finished cross examining
schultz came as a surprise as IL was
generally believed the defense
damned on putting on several wilt
Iesses.
There il no session OF court to-
Law, and no further action in the
murder trial until Monday. Argu-
nents OF the attorneys and the in
tructions OF the court are expected
o consume the greater part OF Mon
lay. The early hours of the session
re expected 10 be taken up in the
OF the courts jury in
It IS believed that the
,ase will be in the hands of the jury
ome time Monday afternoon.
Larger crowds attended the trial
yesterday than at any time since the
rial began las. -.iO..uay. dSmoers
4 the Muessel and Chrobot families
occupied their usual seats inside the
attorneys rail. Every seat in the
,ourt room was occupied at both the
morning and afternoon session Men
nd women who could not get seats
TODD along the walls and in the
isles. The crowds even flowed into
he space reserved for lawyers and
,ther court attendants. The crowds
,eemed disappointed when the de-
ense declined to put on other wit
,eses and rested its case.