Terre Haute Weekly Gazette, Volume 8, Number 44, Terre Haute, Vigo County, 31 May 1877 — Page 8

THURSDAY, MAY 31, 1877.

DECORATION DAY.

Green are the graves, Of the fallen braves The Nation's dead.

liCt the nag of the Unior. to-day float on higb, For under its folds did they conquer and die. ••Scatter the flower* to-day

Over the Blue ami Gray, 'Neath the bright cunshine .AU J. beauty of Spring,"

Nobly they fought and fell, Shattered by shot and shell, On tie red battle field.

Their's 1 the glory—all honor and praise Heroes and martyrs Nation to save.

No more din and rattle, Koar and clash of the battle, Ahull rouse them fr?m slcej),

Tlieyquallod not in danger, they feared not the grave, That their country's prouJ banner in freedom might wave.

Then honor the dead Whose lifo was slied That their

country

J,et not the swor.l they drew, Kver be brandished anew— Banish all strife:

Concord shall join again what Vv ar hath sundered, And the North nnd (he South as brothers be nH nbered.

As the (loot yeaiM go by, Honor their memory— Keverenco their dust. Their glory will never fade— A lasting I'amo they've made, "Si-ntter the flowers to-day Over he Blue and Gray, 'Neath the bright sunsnino And beauty of spring."

MILWAUKEE, WIS. EDWAKD KDGKBTON.

COL. SELLERS is in St. Louis.

CORN is up and looking finely.

OUR streets are fearfully dusty.

AND the picnic fever abounds in the land.

'"Cleanliness is akin to 'Godliness." I c*n be attained by the use of Tdrry Salicylic Soap.

THERE will be a big procession on the Fourth of July. Commence getting ready for your part in it now.

THERE will be a soldier's and sailor's national reunion at Marietta, Ohio, on September 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th.

SEVERAL firms who did not take part in the Fourth of July procession last year have determined lo come out this veai They cannot afford to lose the advertisement.

"WRITE me as one who loves his fel-low-men," says Abou Ben Adhem. The inventoi of Terrv's Salicylic Soap is declined to receive this tribute from countless thousands.

THE current rumors are without foundation. Mr. Dave Paddock is NOT the possessor of

50

fe WeehlU fazc/to |Court House Echoes.

might live.

On the bright pages of War and Olory History will ever recount tho grand story.

young goslings. He re­

tired from the goose business last season, covered all over with giory.

THE Knox case reported fully elsewhere. is attracting a good deal of public attention. Hundreds who cannot attend court, eagerly look for the GAZETTE each evening for full accounts.

Ifyou intend to plant trees in front of your house or any whtre in your yard, be sure to take either the clear or hard maple. The soft maple grows in swamps and will not thrive in the high and dry soil of Terre Haute.

IT is quite annoying to the. phonographic reporter ofour courts here to have some fellow want to swear him in each day. Mr. Carlton has been sworn in as reporter lor the courts and once is enough for a whole term.

THE excursion from Danville to Hutsonville of which mention wis made in the GAZETTE of Saturday evening was a grand success. Over 500 persons being carried to Hudsonville by the P. & D. R. R. and about 300 were transported to Merom from there by ths Prairie City. 11.

EVERY article a leader—Such are the talismanic words that preface the advertisement of \V. S. Ryce & Co in to-day's GAZETTE. The ladies know more about prices than Ye Gay GAZETTEER does but he learns from them that Ryce is selling astonishingly cheap. More than all this no one is ever dissatisfied with what they buy of him.

THE LONG POINT TRIALS.

Mr. Thomas 13. Carr has been notified that the trial of the parties now under arrest charged with the murder ol Milo Eames will come off on the 25th

June

next. This is quire welcome news as it Avas at first thought the cases could not be heard until the middle of August.

ATTEMPTED SUICIDE. liegu'ar Corresponding of the GAEETTE. Robisonllls. May 28, 1S77. A startling cn«* of attempted suicide occured ye?teiii i_ ..uouc noon, scjme four or five miles west ot this place. The would be victim of selt-destruction is an old ladv,—near sixty years of age-the wife ot'Ephraim Bircn a wealthy and well to do farmer. The matter is related about as follows: O11 last Thursday their son, a grown up young man, was doing some waggoning about the farm, and allowed the team to run awav and smashed up things in general. Then on yesterday morning the young man hitched lip the team again for the purpose of taking^ a load of young people to a neighboring school house to church, Mrs Birch protested against the team being used upon such an occasion ltaijng. as she said the horses might again run awuy, and that some of the youngsters might get huyt, But the young man proceeded to carry out his resolutions when the old lady ran into the house and got the razor, then ran out of the house again and commenced cutting at her throat. She made thi-ee strokes, each of which did their work too surely: for the wind pipe was laid bare by the gashes. She is still living and vowing that she willjkill herself yet she: has scarcely a shadow" of a show for recovery. Mrs.

Birch has been afflicted for several years with heart disease, and it is thought that seeing her mandates disobeyed as they were, together with the disease with which she is afflicted, has made her insane. Yet in all things, except the matter of taking her own life she seems perfectly rational.

He Makes a Splendid Defense of Himself.

Beginning of the Knox Trial the Criminal Court.

Other News About the Court House.

Second Day of the Knox Trial.

A Urge Number of Witnesses Examined.—Other Court News.

Richard Strout Testifies That Mr. Knox Might Reasonably

Have Thought from what he--SIrout--Said That he was Willing to

Have the lced Changed.

Which Piece of Evidence Largely^ Acquits Mr. Knox "of any Charge of Criminal Intent.

Although Mr. Strout had

Mr. Knox made a statement in justice to his attorneys McLean and Dalton. They had been called late in the case, owing to the sickness of Mr. Buff who had prepared an address.

Prosecutor Keliy desired the original deed to prove that the wards Lena R. Knox were inserted in it. This Mr. Knox refused to produce, insisting that he had the deed in his pocket and intended to produce it at the right time. Mr. Kelly stated that he had feared Mr. Knox would refuse him the deed and jiad served the following notice on him:

STATE OF INDIANA Indictment for vs. Forgery. THOMAS E. KNOX, To Thomas E. Knox:

You are hereby notified to produce on the trial of the above entitled cause, to be used as evidence for the State of Indiana, a certain deed, now in your possession, made by Richard Strout and Jennie S. Strout, husband and wife, to Thomas E. Knox, which deed now appears of record to have been made to Thomas E. Knox and Lena R. Knox, his wife, said deed being dated January the

29th, 1S76.

ALBERT J. KELLEY, Prosecuting Attorney, Vigo Criminal Circuit Court. The matter was laid before the court, Mr. Kelly citing a recent decision which Mr. McLean said had been over-ruled. The court decided that a defendant could not be compelled to produce evidence against himself.

Mr. Kelley then began his opening statement as follows: He would treat this case as he had conducted all previous ones. If after the evidence was in he thought there was a case made he would push the case for a verdict. On the other hand if he was satisfied there was no case he would take pleasure in putting in a nolle* It was an unpleasant dutv to him in prosecute Mr. Knox who was a brilliant fellow member of the bar. He was, however under oath and the line ol his duty lay' clearly before him. He then read the indictment which has already been published in this paper.

Mr. Kelly read the law to the jury on the subject ofalterating any papers. He stated that the evidence on behalf ot the state would be as follows:

That on the 29th ot January 1S76, Mr. Knox bought of R. S. Strout property on Sixth street corner ot College that the. deed at the time it was executed was made to Thos. E. Kuox and to no other person that the deed was executed the 29th of January iSyGand not received for record until in "October that an agreement was entered into between Mr. Strout and Mr. Knox lespe^ting the payment of certain monies to the Savings Bank that at the time the deed was presented for lecord it contained the names of Thomas E.. Knox and Lena R. Knox that the said deed was altered without the consent or knowledge of Mr. Strout ihat Mr. Knox had once told Mr. Strout he must have a new deed, but that Mr. Strout replied that he would do so if certain payments were made and that Mr. Knox'did not do this, but recorded the altered deed. He then read the la.v in the matter respecting joint tenancy.

Col. McLean here made an objection, stating that the prosecu'.or had no right to enter into argument. The court ruled that it was admissable, and Mr. Knox witlsdrew his objection.

Mr. Kelly proceeded to show that under the law no liens could be enforced against Mr. Knox under the deed as altered, and that payment for certain brick furnished and legal services rendered could not be forced by law.

He related the circumstances of an attempt to enforce a lien by certain parties with some which failed on account of the manner in which the deed was written.

He here stated that in the absence of the original deed which he had endeavored to o-et, but which Mr. Knox declined to produce, he would attempt to prove that the parties who furnished the brick and Messrs. Grimes & Royse who rendered leal services believed that the property had been deeded to Mr. Knox alone, and that fheir claims were good.

Col. McLean stated that the defense would defer its statement until after the

J_ Jfc,

in

110

Right

--Other Parties Being Interested —to Give Such Consent.

The

Matter Will be Submitted to the Jury This Evening.

LATE YESTERDAY NOON.

AFTER-

AFTHRNOON SESSION.

The following witnesses for the State were called: J. II. C. Royse, Richard Strout, B. F. Royse. Andrew Grimes, O. D. Greggs, Wm. E. Hendricks, and Robt. S. Cox.

introduction ot the evidence for the state. Mr. Kelly again called for the original deed. Col. McLean objected and argued his point citing decisions. He urged that in the indictment the deed as altered was not set forth. I le quoted law to sustain his objection to the indictment on this ground. He insisted that the indictment was not perfect as it did not recite the instrument in its altered state—"in haec verba." After considerable discussion, Judge announced that he would reserve his decision until to-morrow morning, in order to give the question that degree of consideration which its importance demands, which, we may here remark, the Judge always does.

Mr. Knox has the sympathy of the bait and many friends, who anxiously awar a verdict.

The trial of Thomas E. Knox was continued in the criminal court this morning, Judge Long presiding. Con siderable interest is manifested and the court room was full at the time the^ trial commenced. The question at the time of adjournment last evening was as to whether the original deed, in the possession of Mr. Knox could be introduced in evidence by the prosecution, the dcfence claiming that the indictment was not sufficiently specific. The court adjourned until this morning to examine authorities and decide. The court had prepared the ruling but the defense withdrew the objection and the trial proceeded.

The prosecution here decided not to use the deed and instead read the official record.

The first witness introduced was deputy recorder MR. FINNEY."

He produced the official recoi of deeds of Vigo county and testified as to its correctness.

RICH. s. STROUT,

was next called and sworn on behalf ot the state. He testified that he had sold to Mr. Knox a picce of property on Sixth street in Uiis city, that he sold it to Thomas E. Knox and no one else: Mr. Knox was not married at that time, lie had a deeu but it was not signed by any woman. He conveyed the property to Thomas E. Knox.

Mr. Strout was shown the deed and asked to state whether or not there had been any change or alteration in it since the execution thereof. He answered that the deed was substantially 'he same excepting the words "and Lena R. Knox, his wife." '•It was not in the deed at the time you signed it?"

The deed was executed in January 1S76. Witness could not swear as to the exact consideration Messrs. Grimes & Royse were the attorneys and drew up the deed. It was a month or so after the deed was executed that it was delivered to Mr. Knox, I had a mortgage from him for $150

Qj-Look at tnat agreement and see if vou entered into that with Mr. Knox that your signature [Here the following agreement was read by the prosecutor]: AGREEMENT BETWEEN STROUT AND

KNOX.

It is agreed this 29th day of January 1876, between Richard Strout and Thomas E. Knex, that the enclosed deed trom Thomas E. Knox for lot OP north Center street, and deed from Richard Strout to Thomas E Knox for lot on south Sixth street, together with note^ for $400 due thirty days after date, signed by Knox in favor of Strout, shall remain in the hands of Grimes & Royse, in escro the deeds to be delivered to the respective parties at the expiration of that time on payment of said note, and clear abstract being furnished by respective parties to the lots conveyed except the mortgage to the Tcrre Haute Saving Bank, specified in and for Strout to Knox. [Signed] THOMAS D. KNOX

RICHARD STROUT.

"That is my signature," we jnade that agreement and signed it." The original deed I made to Mr. Knox, which ia now in his possession or someone elses, was just the same except as to the words "and Lena R. Knox his wife," which has been inserted since the execution of the deed.

Witness did not know when the deed was delivered to him. The agreemenl upon the back ol this, was not the agreement upon which the deed had been delivered and the reason is that Mr. Knox could not pay the

$400,

and witness took two notes from Mr. Knox I remember of his telling me before the thirty days were up that he was unable to pay. I remember that a new contract was made at the expiration of the thirty days one of the notes given in the new contract was given to Messrs Grimes and Royse as re«il estate agents. The witness testified in regard to selling the property to Mi. Knox and the pay and the manner in which thepayments were to be made. He had tried to collect the money but failed and had entered proceedings in court far the recovery thereof. The record was examined by the witnes and reconized

R. H. c. ROYSE.

A description of the propertybotight by Mr. Knox was read and reconized by the witness. He had drawn a deed conveying the same about a year or so ago. He remembered the agreement that had been entered into. He didn't recollect just when the deed was delivered. The property was deeded by Mr. Strout to Thomas E. Knox and no one else. He thinks that the words "and Lena R. Knox, his wife" had been inserted since the deed was drawn. Not only thinks so but knows it.

ANDREW GRIMES.

Mr. Knox had become indebted to witness through Mr. Strout by assuming the payment of a hundred dollar note1 He had failed to pay and witness had sued thereon before Esquire Ccokerly and afterward filed a transcript in the circuit com t. Didn't know whether an execution had been issued there «r not. This has not yet been collected. The reason he didn't take steps to collect was that he understood that it was impossible to collect it.

JOHN T. SCOTT.

Mr. Scott had had some business in the Circuit court in regard to the enforcement of a. mechanics lien against Mr. Knox, In this court the subject of the

ALTERED DEED.

came up and Mr. Knox in his ceurse of remarks said that he desired to make a statement in justice to himself. Witness could not recollect the exact words but the purport was that the deed had been made to himself (Knox) and that afterwards he requested Mr. Strout

to allow his wifes name to be inserted and that it was done with Mr. Strout's permission. Mr. Knox said that he had been married since the deed had been executed and that his wife had lurnished some of the money, and for that reason he desired his ife's name to be inserted in the deed, and that Mr. Strout agreed toit.

A. J. GRIMES

Recalled—He delivered the deed to Messrs. Kn^x and S:rout, in person Didn't kn exactly when, but it must have been in the latter part of May or the first of June.

CIIAS. D. FLA ID

testified that he is a constable and that an executi-n had been issued to him. but that ho had in his possession an execu tion that hid been issued a year or so before and therefore had not taken steps to collect the one of the late date Mr. Knox said that he was going to file a schedule and mild pay the amount by the tenth of this month.

A. J. GRIMES

was again recalled bv the state and reiterated his former testimony to the effect that he had .examined the records and didn't push his claim from the fact that lie thought he could not collect it ami that it would make him liable for heavy co t'. He was impressed that the deed was made to Thomas E, Knox alone. He did not transact the writing of the deed himself but was consulted. He didn't know when or upon what points lie was consulted but knew that he had imparted advice at that lime he didn't know of Mr. Knox owning any property other than that on Sixth street, and made no inquiries.

CONRAD ASIIMORE

testified that he had furnished brick for Mr Knox's house in June,

rense

1S76.

He was

in partnership at the time with Oliver D. Greggs. Had never received a cent for the brick. Mr. Knox still owed him. The original amount was $576. and this, with the exception of ten dollars which had been paid on an order by witness to ron Deming, was still due. Witness had taken Mechanics lien upon the house. Here a'discussion .nose as to the validity of the mechanics lien, the de-

objecting on the ground tha' it was not specific enough to recover upon. The court overrul: the objection.

The witness testified that the lien is still unpaid, lie had brought suil to enforce the lien. He teotified that he did not sell all the brick to Mr. Knox, but that many had it been delivered None of the briek he sold Mr. Knox went into the house. The brick that he sold to Mr. Blood were used in the construction of the building

R. s. cox

stated that he had no interest in the claim of Asherman and Gregg. Mr. Asherinan owed witness and he relied in what Mr. Knox owed hiin to pay the indebted* edness and therefore when Mr. Knok should pay the money witness would receive it. He had never said that 1 had an order for it and it was at Mr. Hendricks' office. He had never employed an attorney to look into the matter and Mr. Scott had done so under a mistaken impression.

AFTERNOON.

The examination of Asherman was continued. He identified an order on Mr Knox given to witness. This was admitted by the defense and admitted as evidence.

WM. E. HENDRICH.

Witness testified that he was employed by Mr. Asherman to enforce a mechanic's lieu. He filed the lien against Mr. Knox and commenced an action of foreclosure in the circuit court, which is now pending. He tried to collect the money from Mr. Knox. He declined to pay it and said that he was going to fight the claim. Mr. Knox was very reticent in telling why he would not give an order for the payment of the money. Had several in .icws with him in'regard to the payment of the money. There has never been any assignment of the order.

The defense here rested and Mr. Buff stepped forward and said in substance as fjllows

The defense will come chiefly from Mr. Knox. The evidence will be that he bought the property from Mr. Strout and was to assume several obligat ons and pay $450 cash It was agreed 1h.1t Grimes Si Royse should have charge of the papers. Before the thirty days expired Mr. Knox disappointed in getting the money and turned to arrange the matter with Mr. Strout. About this time he married and his wife having some money agreed to help build a residence if he would have the deed made in both names. Mr. Knox interviewed Mr, Strout on this subject and the evidence shows that he agree*'. The day belore his wife arrived he hunted up the deed and meeting Mr. Streut suggested that the deed,be changed. Mr. Strout replied all right, whereupon Mr. Knox did alter the deed by inserting his wife's name in the deed. So far as any criminal intent is concerned it will be shown that Mr. Knox had not yet made any contract with the carpenters at the time.

It will be shown that he could not possibly intended in any way to defrauc the contractors. 'Ihere are two counts: One with intention to d, fraud Ashman and Greggs and the second to defraud Grime's & Royse. It will be shown that he is and has betn tor sometime able to pay this money. But it will be shown that it grew out of a personal feeling.

MR. KNOX.

I got a certain deed from Mr. Strout. Never talked with Mr. Strout till sometime after the $400 note became due. In '74 he owned a house on north Sixth street and negotiated with Mr Royse for trade for Mr. Strout's property. He was to assume a $1,200 note and pay $450 in cash. He was expecting money and they agreed upon a fixed time. Both parties made dseds. The $450 was placed in an envelope. In a short time he found out he cou'.d not make the payment and so informed Mr Strout. The first thing the witness knew that he was to be held to the contract, was upon be frig informed that the deed had been placed upon record.

On the 26th ef Feburarv he was married and his wife was to furnish some money in building a residence. So the trade was perfected with the understanding that there was to be a new deed made out. Witness had informed Mr. Strout that he wanted anew dead and he agreed.

He went to Royse's office and asked for the deed, they could not find it, went away without it. On the 16th day of May went to Gr imes' office and asked for the deed, he also went to Strouts office.

Mr Strout gave him to understand the

deed was at Royse's office. But Mr Gri nes gave him the deed in the evening then went to Strout's office, he was not there and saw him on the street and told him that if he didn't want tc make a new deed we could insert my wife's name in the old one. Not to defraud any one but as a matter of right, she paying a portion of the purchase money.

He made no objection, but gave me to understand that if it suited me it did him. Witness then went to the office and wrote his wifes name in the deed. It was about the 1st of October that the deed was recorded.

At the time of going to press Mr Knox was still on the stand. MR. KNOX ON THE STAND.

The GAZETTE'S report of the Knox trial last night closed at half after three o'clock with Mr. Knox still on the stand. Mr. K's statement was very free and explicit and it is justice to him to say that it was gratitying to his friends. He continued iu reference to the length of time which expired before the deed was recorded, as follows:

This was more a matter of negligence than anythiug else. When Mr. Strout went to record the deed it was found that there had been a mistake made in the mortgage.

When the note due Royse for $100 became due he was unable to pay it. Mr. Royse came for the payment but I could not pay it told Royse if he would wait a few days I would pay him. He walked across the street and sued me, and I thought he wouic collect it through the law. He came intr office and asked me lor the money. I told him I didn't have it. He then told ine if I didn't pay it he would have me indicted for altering the deed. I told him that I altered the deed but did nothing wrong in doing so

He made arrangement with the bank for an extension of time on the note and paid the interest. When the time came the note was paid. About the middle of June he employed Hamilton and Howard to build a house, they were to have $500 in August and the balance when the house was completed, and if he failed to have the money would borrow it as the house would be clear. They did the work. Sometime in August Conrad Asherman presented the order which has been offered in evidence. He told Eshman he did'nt have the money then but accepted the order: iound out thatihehad a partner, so he refused to pay the order. Matters went on and it was sometime in December, and in order to meet obligations, was compelledjto make a loan negotiated loan with Hosford. This mechanics lien was l.ot filled until 9th o' January. I told Mr Hendricks that I would not pay the lien as the contractors had payed Mr. Blood, and that if I paid it I would still be liable for $4^0, In regard to who purchased the brick Witness purchased a few thousand from Asherman for paving purposes. He gave Demming an order for $250, and he paid 15. The next tim^ Dimming came Ash eiman had filed the lien and I lefused to payanv more and stated my reasons for not doing so. Don't owe Asherman and Gregg a single dollar unless it is for those which were used for paving &c. Whenever he was compelled to pay this he would do 60 and not before. At this time the judgment was taken Had office furn'ture a full vet of Indiana reports, and a good library. Also a good desk, sofa &c. worth about $600. Had 55 feet of ground on south Third worth about $1,200. Had real estate in Clark county Illinois worth $1,600 twenty acres worth $1,000. Both deeds were put in one envelope. Witness fir»t learned that his deed was placed upon record by see ing it in the newspaper and was very much surprised, from- the fact that he had positively ordered Royse and Strout not to do so.

He had recollections ®f conversations with Mr. Str«ut in regard to anew deed The conversations were numerous

This insertion ot "and Lena R. Knox his wife." was made by you without any intention on your part "to defraud anybody at that time. Had never heard of Conrad Asherman. At the time he made this insertion he had 110 purpose, design or intention to defrauding Grimes & Royse in the collection of their $100 debt. Never thought of such a thing, as he intended to pay it. There was some pertonal feeling in the mean manner in which he treated me.

Mr. Strout made no new deed, but accepted it with the changes I made in it. Mr. Strout consented to the change. That was the deed that was acknow ledged by the notary public. Did not get the consent of Mrs. Strout as it was not necessary. The reason he accepted the $450 order was that he supposed Mr Asherman was the owner ot the brickyard. They never countermanded

Mr. Gregg never spoke to me about it. I never asked Gregg that if I would pav it he would give me a receipt. I lold these parties whenever they get a judgment I would pay it and not belore.

There is a dispute as to the amount that is due. There is not that amount due Mr. Asherman.

It may be possible that I told Mr, Hendricks to get »11 parties together and settle it without going to law.

There is a difference between the parties as to what is due a difference of some two hundred dollars. Suit was brought lo enforce the mechanics lien They did not get judgment against me apd THAT IS THE REASON THIS SUIT 19

BBOUGHT

herefrom the fact that Mr. Hendricks told me if I didn't pay this I would be indwed. Didn't tell why there would be an indictment.

He told witness that he had just been subpoened before the grand jury. Understood Mr. Hendricks lo say that "you had better settle up that claim or you will be indicted" witness told Mr. Hendricks that they had better indict and that he didnt propose to be 6cared into paying a claim he didn't owe. Paid the note in October 1876. That was some of my wife's money. Witness didn't know just where he got it. lie got some from his wife. Perhaps the money was borrowed from Hosford.

Though he haid $1500 at bank in December. Don't know whether thi note was included or not.- There is still $100

due

on the note in bank. The note

given was to raise this morgage. Ha was asked what the contract the house was for.

for

A—$3,300. There were changes in the root, the first design being for a shingle roof and a slate roof being afterward putin. The difference was about $500.

How much did the entire house cost? An objection waa here made by the defense. Mr. Kelley proceeded to 6how

that he desired to ask the question because he could show that the money which went in to pay for the house was borrowed from Mr. C. E. Hosford.

The court ruled that the questiou was admissable as Mr. Knox stated that he wished the deed changed to protect his wife whs had put h«r money in.

Q^-How much did the entire house cost? A—Is,too.

Qj—Howmuch of that have vou paid? A—Nearly all of it Qj-How much do you owe Hamilton & Howard?

A—They have sold try note which they have discounted for $235. Qj—Do you owe any other sums?

A—I may owe ^pmething to the painters. O—Were you married at the time you got the deed?

A—Yes. C^-How much money did you get from Hosford?

A—$3200. Qj—How much is the mortgage for? A—$3500. The $300. is for interest and commissions.

Qj-In your settlement with Hamilton & Howard was not the claim of Asherman and Gregg taken into account?

A—It was It was in dispute. In the settlement how did this claim of Ascheaman stand? jn statu quo. I did not know how to settle it. It will go to Hamilton and Howard if I am not compelled to pay it to Ascherman and Grigg but if I am compelled to pay to Aschinan and Greggs Hamilton and Howaid must lose it. They hsve treated me honorably and wish to stand by tiem.

Q^Why have you not paid this crder: did Hamilton and Howard object to it? A. No, Mr Blood told those gentlrmen he would pay them.

Q^This amount? A. I doa't know about it exactly. lie owes them for the brick. Theie is some dispute.

Do you expect to pay their claim? Ans.—I certainly do. Q,.—Why did't you put in a plea 0 coverture in the circuit court when Mr Hendricks sued in the mechanic's lien?

Ans—Because I did not wish a personal judgment against my wife. Mr Hendricks has gone into circuit cour two terms and has not made his plead ings r(ght to collect the claim. I can' tell who to pay this claim to until judg ment is rendered.

This matter was argued at length anc dropped. —The $1,600 which has been pro duced was given to Uke up the $i,2o note and tbe $400 note of Blood's, it not?

Ans.—Yes, sir. —Did you not get the money fron Hosford?

Ans.—Yes. It being after 5 o'clock the coii't her adjournt-o until this morning.

THIS MORNINU.

Mr. Dalton on the part of the defens made a motion to the effect that all th evidence relative to the mechanic's lie: be stricken out and gave as a reason thai there is a suit pending in the circuit cour| which as yet had not been decided. Th motion was overuled by the court. Th.| examination ot the defendant.

THOMAS E. KN8X.

was continued. The -following are th answers, the questions being omitted own eighty acres of lanJ in Illinois ha\ owed it since 1S69. It was deeded I myself and there was no incumbranc upon it have another picce of propcrtf of twenty acres upon which there is small incumbrance. This judgment Grimes and Royse is not the oldest or against me 1 paid one hundred dollars Mall's Safe company. I dor know how many judgmen there aae against me—probably two three. There is one as security for cost Ben Reagan has an execution of 01 hundred doliars. I don't know that ever told Ben Reagan that

I WAS GOING TO SCHEDULE. I rather think, however, that I did win I borrowed money for the payment these claims against the house, the smou for which I gave my note was $3,50 Along sometime in January, before all the money had come and after the fit money ha'd heen paid, this mechanics lit was filed and Mr. Hosford refused to p. me any more till the mechanics lien 6e:tled. Aftei wards Mr. Hosford sa that if I would give bonds of indemni he would pay me the money. I gave hi the bond with the understands that if a judgment rendered against me the boi would be good for the payment of money I made a proposition to Hendricks and to Mr. Allen of Alle Mack & Davis. 1 hold judgeme against Gregg for $150, which, of cours is no off set against Gregg and Ashe man in law, it is merely a private clai I proposed to Hendricks that we shoi ascertain the amount and that Mr. At erman allow me credit for $150, and would pay the balance in money, I ma that proposition to Hendricks and aftt ward to Mr. Allen if they would me their pleadings so as to state the fa and I would then file answer and allow them to take judgment against the property for amount and I would pay it. The proj sition has not yet been accepted and dont know whether it will be or not fn the fact that there is some dispute as the amount of brick used.

I never had any contract with Gregg Asherman for brick that went into building had a contract for some, kuow just howmany, that were used paving, and in the sinks and vaults.

The time of the letting of the contr for building the house was, to the best my recollection, between the iS'.h, and last day of June of last year.

THE ALTERATION

was made on the 16th. day of Mty. contract with II amilton and Howard made along about the 18th. of The date of the new contract was time of the giving of the note, upon wh Grimes & Koyse sued—the 4th day April. At the time the change in deed was made I did not know who contractors would be. It was someti after I got the deed, which was in latter part of June that I made arran ments with Hamilton & Howard for building. In regard to the propositio to the settlement of this mechanics lie stated the proposition to Mr. Gregg, want the jury to understand that brick that went into the house were purchased by me at all.

If they sold the brick to Mr. B1 with the distinct understanding that were to look to the building they have

Continued on Third Page.