Search America's historic newspaper pages from 1836-1922 or use the U.S. Newspaper Directory to find information about American newspapers published between 1690-present. Chronicling America is sponsored jointly by the
National Endowment for the Humanities and the Library of Congress. external link Learn more
Image provided by: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, Urbana, IL
Newspaper Page Text
r,f UUJirfHU U ,VU Jlli'
JUROR NEAR UPSETS WOOD
TRIAL WITH A DISCOVERY.
Boston, Mass., June 3. The de
fense in the dynamite conspiracy
case of William M.Wood, million
aire head of the American Woolen
Co., rested this afternoon after a
morning session of court full of sen
sations. A complete defense will be made
by Atteaux's attorneys, but Wood
will present no witnesses.
Wood's lawyers immediately began
an argument for the judge to direct
a verdict in favor of their client, de
claring the state had not made out
a case against him. Pelletier object
ed to the argument being made he
fore the Atteaux defense had been
put in, but the district attorney was
pverruled by Judge Crosby.
John Enos, a juror, came near up-
Judge John C. Ccosby, of Massa
chusetts, who presides in the trial of
William Wood and others, at Boston,
.on a charge of conspiracy to "plant"
i dynamite at Lawrence during, the
strike last winter. He has shown him
. se f a strong apd impartial judge.
setting the whole trial this morning,
and for a time had the district at
torney worried by a discovery he
The prosecution rests its case
mainly on the testimony of Arthur
Pira, a chauffeur, who declared fhe
drove a man resembling Atteaux
from Wood's home to the place where
John J. Breen swore he met Atteaux
and arranged to plant the dynamite.
Pira refreshed his memory with a
record card he kept of his move
ments on Jan. 19, 1912, the day the
alleged plot was planned. District
Attorney Pelletier UBed this card as
a basis for his questions. Attorney
Coakley for the defense referred to
it time and again on cross-examination.
When he finished the card was
passed to the jury.
It was examined casually until it
came to Enos. He looked the card
over carefully. He called Pelletier
to the' box anad pointed to the card.
It bore the date of Jam 19, 1911,
and not 1912, as had been contended
by the lawyers.
The defense immediately' chal
lenged the authenticity of "the card,
claiming it upset the state's entire
Pelletier then called Albert S. Mar
vin, an ex-officer of the Bosibn Tax
cab Co., to the stand.
Marvin testified that the cards
were numbered consecutively, and
that the one in question bore a sim
lar number to those dated January,
1912. The witness declared that
while the routine of the cards indi
cated they were issued-1 in. the' reg
ular way, and on Jan. 19 1912, he
was not prepared to swear positive
ly that this was so. Some of the
cards bore no year at all; merely the
date of the month.
Pelletier sent ior the duplicate
bdks of he company to sjiow that
this card was actually filed out'ifl
1912. The witness, however, de
clined to. make any positive answer,
even with the books before him, and
the district attorney demanded:
I96lUV. Yd 93U9lorf Tf&i .yj9W$3jiSOiqui9 flOUIv TW W al4 OS?ltf