Year: 1879

Although the particulars of the terrible explosion
of the boiler of the steamer Adelphi, off Norwalk.
Conn.,, tho 18th of last September have been re-
peatedly published in the HERALD since the fatal
casualty, still novel end interesting facts have
been already developed in the trial before Judge
Barrett. in Supreme Court, Circuit. of the suit
brought by James Leonard administrator of Sarah
Leonard. his sister. one Of the unfortunate
victims Of the accident. against the Colum-
bia Steam Navigation Company for $4,000 damages
account of her death. The court room was
crowded yesterday. number of prominent steam-
boat men being among the throng in attendance.
For Mr.. Leonard the counsel Christopher Fine
and Leopold Turk this city and General Taylor. of
Norwalk. Conn.,. and Mr.. Dennis McMalon appear
for the defendants. On the opening of the court
quite lengthy discussion the question
whether the action is properly brought in this State
there being in Connecticut similar statute to- the
one under which the suit is brought here. Judge
Barrett held that the objection interposed to the
bringing OF the suit hero was not well taken, and
ordered the trial to proceed.


After brief opening by Mr. Fine. reciting the par
ticulafs Of the disaster and the killing of Miss
Leonard and the facts he proposed prove showing
that the accident was he alleged, the result Of
cnlpabie negligence, MIS- Jane Leonard, the mother
simply testified that her daughter lived with her up
to the time OF the accident. and gave her version of
what she considered her services as such daughter
worth. Mrs. Lane the next witness, WAS
the Adelphi at the time OF the explosion
and identified Miss Leonard IA one of the persons
fatally injured. The important witness during
the day was John Cotton. practical machinist and
engineer. He stated that he examined the boiler OF
the Adelphi after the explosion, and found 1t
at the place Of the explosion only onesi1tecnth of
an inch thick, whereas it should have been three
eighths OF inch thick. He stated further that
there were nine patches the boiler; that the
crown sheets had fallen down through overstrain;
that the boiler was not in tit condition to that
with tie boiler at its best he would not have given
certificate allowing more than twonty-six pounds to
the square inch whereas ut the time OF the ex-
posion the pressure thirty eight pounds to the
square inch. Mr.. EEen Hill manager OF the Nor
walk Iron Works, who also examined the boiler
corroborated the testimony of Mr.. Cotton. He
planned the difference between the government rules
for testing steam boilers and those laid down by Mr.
Haswell. The government, he stated, tests the
strength of boiler a solid sheet Of iron, without
allowance for joints and rivet holes while Haswelis
theory tests the strength of the iron i'll boiler form
claiming that the rivets weaken the iron and that
the boiler be stronger than at it's weakest
joints, where tho laps and rivets According to
the government rules this boiler, in his opinion,
should never have been allowed pressure over
thirtysix pounds to the square inch, and under the
Haswell rule not over twenty-four pounds


The trial will probably occupy several days. It is
stated that experts will be called by the defence
to controvert the testimony Of tho experts examined
on the plaintiffs side


FORGING A POST OFFICE ORDER.


The trial of James Norris in the United States Cir
cult Court before Judge Benedict for forging Post
Office money ORDERS resulted yesterday in q convc-
tion c. NJ Cady, the complainant, and officer YOU
mans. OF the Post Office Department, had testified
Monday to an acknowledgment by the prisoner that
he had committed the crime The defendant claimed
that he made the confession under threats from
Oficer Sharretts that unless he did so the young
woman to whom the prisoner was betrothed
and whose name had been indorsed upon
check would be arrested and sent to
prison. The prisoner also testified that the
officer promised him. immunity from punishment
unless the money orders should prove to have been
stolen from the Post Office Department. Under this
uncontradicted testimony motion was made to
have the confession stricken out on the ground that
it was not voluntary This motion was denied. In
summing up II. w. sackett, counsel for the prisoner
directed the attention of the jury particularly to the
question whether the confession true. When
first arrested 1t argued that the prisoner, when
confronted with the forged post Office money orders
and the check with the name of his betrothed in
aorsea upon H. aola Inc & Irn,n & INA, ne explained
cumstances; that when the officers returned from
their search after the real offender and without
that unless he acknowledged the forgery him.
self the young woman would be sent to prison,
and that to save her, knowing that they both were
innocent he took upon himself the offence aud said
that he committed IL. The counsel submitted to the
jury that this was the only evidence against the
prisoner and that under the circumstances he could
not hayo done otherwise, however innocent he might
have been. Assistant District Attorney Butler called
truth of the confession-tho prisoners fear
about presenting the money orders for pay
ment, his attempt to protect himself behind
innocent persons and his departure from tho city
when the fraud was discovered. The jury were also
asked TO compare the handwriting of the signature
acknowledged by the prisoner to be his with the
forged signatures upon the money orders.


Tho facts OF the briefly reviewed by Judge
Benedict in his charge, the question whether the
confession entitled TO ercdence being left to the
Jury. After absence of thrce-quarters of hour
the jury returned o verdict OF guilty. Following the
verdict notice of motion in arrest Of judgment
given; this, by the way, being tho first III this
district under the recent act OF Congress which per-
mts appeals wrs Of error from tho United States
District to the United States Circuit Court.