The Union & Advertiser
February 21, 1896

CHATFIELD Case Fifth Day
Testimony Bearing on the Theory of Self-Defense
Witnesses Testify as to the Character of KEARNS and the Defendant
The Oaths of the A. P. A., and How a Former
Member Evaded Some While Taking Others

     The trial of Egbert H. CHATFIELD, accused of murder, was resumed today with the defense endeavoring to make out its case of self-defense.
There was the usual throng in the corridor outside the court room, but Sheriff HANNAN's force Of deputies permit no crowding in the court room.
It is now believed that the defense will occupy at least all day tomorrow and the case will probably go to the jury early next week.

                                                                         A Juror With a Bible
     Juror ARNOLD sat smilingly in the box reading his bible while court was waiting for the attorneys to begin. Mr. ARNOLD kept the bible in his hand with the page marked during the day and was a prominent figure. He is one of the most animated of the jury men, leaning forward whenever any good points are made on either side.  Mr. ARNOLD is a Quaker, but stated that he had no conscientious scruples which would interfere with his serving on a jury on a murder trial before he was accepted.

     When the people called James MCCULLOCH yesterday afternoon as an expert to show at what distance the shot was fired to produce the hole found in KEARNS' clothes, a series of objections was made by Mr. RAINES. The people were unable to prove that the cartridges offered in evidence were those actually taken from the pistol after CHATFIELD's arrest. The people were therefore unable to prove that the cartridges used in the experiments by the people's experts were of the same make as those taken from the cartridge. Mr. RAINES' objections were sustained by the court on the ground that there should be no speculation on this matter. Mr. WARREN announced he would try to introduce evidence in this line on the rebuttal.

                                                     Mr. OAKLEY and A. P. A.
    The defense then called Sylvester H. OAKLEY of Epworth street as its first witness. He testified that he had known CHATFIELD and KEARNS for many years; that he always regarded the defendant as peaceable, but KEARNS was a quarrelsome man and a hard fighter.
     Cross-examined by Mr. WARREN:  "Now, Mr. OAKLEY, when you joined the A. P. A. did you not take an oath not to swear against or injure a member of that organization?"
     "I decline to answer."
     Justice DAVY - "I think you will have to answer that, Mr. OAKLEY."
     "I don't remember; I may have."
    Witness said he bought a revolver of the defendant several years ago.

John BAKER, an old man, living on Genesee street, testified that he had known CHATFIELD for two years and regarded his reputation as good.
Witness said he bought a revolver of the defendant last spring.

________ss Oakly
(several words at the beginning of each of the next few lines are missing)
____ have you ever seen _______ tt's saloon?"
______ at any other saloon?" ______ at OAKLEY's."
W_____ he was not a member of the A. P. A.?"

William WINDGATE was next called. He lived in Chili and bought a revolver from the defendant in the fall of 1894. He consulted the defendant in the matter because he knew his father dealt in those articles.
     Mr. WARREN - "Did you ever attend any A. P. A. meetings at OAKLEY's."
     "Yes, sir."

Christian STEINER, another boy friend of the defendant, took the stand. He lives on Weldon avenue and bought a gun from the defendant about four years ago.
     Mr. RAINES - "Did Bert usually carry a revolver, when he was out?"
     Witness - "Bert?  Yes; and I generally carry one myself."

STEWART A. Pattison also testified to buying a gun from the defendant at one time. He often went out with him on frog-shooting expeditions.
     "Is this the pistol he had on these expeditions?" asked Mr. RAINES, picking up the pistol from the table with which KEARNS was shot.
    "Yes, sir."
    "Did Bert ever say anything to you about the A. P. A.?"
    "Yes, sir."
    "Did you ever join it?"
    "No, sir."
    "What did he say to you about the A. P. A.?"
    "He told me he belonged to it."

Daniel RICE, an old man about 60 years of age, living at Chili, testified that he bought a revolver of the defendant a couple of years ago, going to CHATFIELD for it because he knew he dealt in them. Witness said KEARNS bore a bad reputation as a fighter. He had worked with the elder CHATFIELD at carpenter work now and then.

                                                           A Woman With a Past
     Mrs. Mary VOGHT was next sworn.  She said she had lived upon the River road for the last fifteen years. She testified to an occasion a year ago last October at EISMAN's place when she had heard Dom KEARNS make threats against the defendant. She also testified to another occasion when she and her husband visited a Front street saloon, when the defendant, who was also present, exhibited great alarm on seeing a member of the SLATTERY gang and told her that the gang had made threats of doing him.

Mr. WARREN closely cross-examined this witness as to her personal history, and in replying to his questions several times she broke down sobbing violently. In answer to his questions she said she was 47 years old and married.
     "Do you know a man named Parsons DECROFT?" asked Mr. WARREN.
     "Yes, sir," replied the witness hesitatingly.
     "Did you run away with him at one time?"
     "No, sir."
     "Were you and Parsons DECROFT indicted jointly for forgery?"
     "Yes, sir; through a mistake."
     "Did you and he go to a broker's and obtain money through false representation and said he was your husband?"
     "Yes, sir, I didn't know the law."
     "Did you ever go away with him nights?"
     "No, sir; I never went away with him."
     "Was he convicted on the charge I have mentioned?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "Did you testify at his trial?"
     "Yes, sir."
Witness was questioned about the occasion when Bert was on Front street and was frightened by the SLATTERYs. When questioned as to who was there witness replied, her sister, nieces and such ones; the place was full.
     Mr. WARREN asked witness if he understood correctly that "they were full."
     This occasioned a tilt with Mr. RAINES.
     "What kind of a time, Mrs. VOGT, were these people having, a sort of a jambourine?"  Mr. WARREN finally asked.
     "No; it was a respectable place."  (Indignantly)
     "On Front street?" asked Mr. WARREN, apparently surprised.
     At this point her further cross-examination was put over until today, court adjourning at _:30 o'clock

Mrs. VOGT was again put on the stand at 10:15 o'clock this morning, the delay in opening court being on account of Mr. RAINES being late. The cross-examination of the witness by Mr. WARREN was continued.
     Mrs. VOGT said on the night of the Front street incident CHATFIELD left the saloon just ahead of her and walked along while she waited on the sidewalk about ten minutes for her son.
     "How far did you follow Bert?"
     "I saw him walking up to Main street and he turned to the Four Corners."
     "Was there anybody else on Front street, then?"
     "I didn't see anybody."
     "When did SLATTERY appear?"
    "He came out of a saloon about five minutes later."
    "Why did Bert go ahead and leave you there?"
     "He said he was afraid of SLATTERY?"
     "SLATTERY had not appeared up to that time?"
     "He came out of the saloon in five minutes."
     "You have a daughter?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "Bert kept company with her?"
     "No; he called at the house some."
     "He took her out occasionally?"
     "Perhaps."
     "Which SLATTERY came out of the   saloon?"
     "Pat SLATTERY."
     "Where did he go?"
     "Toward Main street."
     "You then walked along to Main street alone?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "You took the Plymouth avenue car at the Four Corners?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "Why didn't you take it at Front street."
     "I never take a car at Front street."
     "Bert took the same car?"
     "He did."
     "You didn't know he would wait for you at the Four Corners?"
     "No; he said if a car came along he would take it. None came along until I got there, I suppose."
     "You both got off at WALTERS' saloon?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "Did you stop in the saloon together?"
     "No, sir. I went home with Caleb OAKLEY and I think Bert went home, too."
As Mr. WARREN closed his cross-examination Mr. RAINES said:  "Now Mrs. VOGT if there is anything you wish to say in explanation of the matters touched upon by counsel, you may do so."
     "I don't think it was right for him to talk the way he did."
     Mr. RAINES - "No. Do not say anything against counsel, but anything in explanation of the DECROFT incident."
Witness said he and her husband had words and separated. DECROFT told her to sign the paper and she did so.
     Mr. WARREN - "He representing himself as your husband, VOGT, and you signed it as Mrs. VOGHT?"
     "Yes, sir."
     Mr. WARREN's Objection

Mrs. Mary A. Pierce of Cottage street was sworn for the defense.
     "Did you," asked Mr. RAINES, "see Dominick KEARNS knock a man down and kick him until he was insensible in front of your house?"
Mr. WARREN - "I object to this as irrelevant.  Dominick KEARNS is in his grave and we cannot meet such evidence, which has nothing to do with the case."
     Mr. RAINES - "I thought counsel would open the door to this line of evidence."
     Mr. WARREN - "You didn't open the door."
Justice DAVY said the objection was sustained, as specific acts could not be introduced but only the general reputation of deceased."

Nelson BOOTH of Genesee street, a former Brighton farmer, was sworn.
    "Did Johnny CURVIN tell you after the shooting that KEARNS knew before he entered the hotel that CHATFIELD had a revolver; that if CHATFIELD had not shot KEARNS the latter would have killed the defendant?"
     Witness said those were not the words used.  An effort to show what the words were was objected to by the defense, a foundation not having been laid for it in CURVIN's testimony, and the objection was sustained.  Mr. RAINES stating that he would recall the witness later and get at it in another way.
     Witness said CHATFIELD's reputation as a peaceable man was good.
     Cross-examined by Mr. WARREN:
     "How many times a day do you go to OAKLEY's?"
     "Some days two or three times."
     "You have seen Bert there a good many times?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "That is reputed to be an A. P. A. headquarters?"
     "I do not know."
     "Do you belong to that organization?"
     "No, sir."
     "You have played cards with Bert at OAKLEY's?"
     "Once."
     "Also with his father?"
     "Yes."
     "Shook dice with him?"
      "I don't remember."
     "You heard of the Drew fight in which Bert figured?"
     "I did."
     "You heard of the fight in KRUGER's saloon on Front street when Bert drew a gun?"
     "No, sir."
     "You heard of the time when Mon OAKLEY was going to strike Frank KANE and CHATFIELD drew a gun?"
     "I did not."
     Mr. RAINES - "If the counsel will bring Frank KANE here I will not object to his asking him if Bert drew a gun."
     "The trouble is KANE now works for Bert's father," said Mr. WARREN.
     "He does not," retorted Mr. RAINES.
     "He did a short time ago and we can prove it," said Mr. WARREN.
     Mr. RAINES then said he was willing that any reputable witness who was present in OAKLEY's should be examined as to it.
     "I do not know that any reputable person was there, " Mr. WARREN said.
     "There was a reputable man there," said Mr. RAINES.  "Monroe OAKLEY was there and he is a gentleman as you will find.
Mr. WARREN then asked witness if he heard of an incident in a Lyell avenue saloon when Bert was with a girl and the proprietor tried to eject them and Bert drew a gun.
     Witness replied in the negative.
Mr. RAINES said he challenged the people to produce any witnesses as to these fictitious occurrences.  "Bring on any witness not a member of your gang," said Mr. RAINES.
    A tilt as to the gangs on either side followed.
     Mr. RAINES then asked witness if Johnny CURVIN told him the reason he hadn't said more on the preliminary examination was because he was afraid KEARNS would mop the floor with him.  Witness told CURVIN to tell the whole truth next time.
     Mr. WARREN - "You have spent a great real of time telling CURVIN how to swear?"
     "No, sir."
     "You have been with him a great deal since the shooting?"
     "We have fished together some."

Clarence W. WELCH of Genesee street testified that he went chestnutting with Bert six or seven years ago and Bert fell out of a tree about eighteen or twenty feet to the ground.
     Mr. WARREN objected to the details of this accident as immaterial.
     Mr. RAINES said he proposed to show that defendant never recovered from the accident but was left weak physically and unequal to a combat.

Witness then said that in the fall Bert cut his head and face and injured his wrists.  Bert tried to walk and fell down.  He was then carried to a house a mile away and was taken home in a carriage. Witness thought Bert acted as if he was a Little out of his head after the accident.  Bert complained of his back and witness thought his back must have been injured, preventing him from walking.  After that Bert favored his back in his movements.
     George TAYLOR, who was with Bert and WELCH on the chestnuting  trip, was called and told about the same story as the previous witness.

Mrs. Catherine TAYLOR, mother of the last witness, testified that after Bert was injured he was carried to her home in Chili, having been injured as the two last witnesses described.

George LEWALTER testified that he had seen CHATFIELD shooting frogs along the canal.  He thought the revolver was the one produced in court.
    Witness testified that he had heard KEARNS spoken of as quarrelsome.

Cross-examined by Mr. WARREN witness said he went to OAKLEY's whenever there was a dance, also went to WALTERS' and "Schuper Mary's" saloon in Chili.  He had heard the boys in these places speak of the KEARNSes and SLATTERYs, but had never heard Dominick KEARNS specifically mentioned except once when Saloonkeeper Eisen said he closed up because Dominick KEARNS and the SLATTERYs were fighting so much.
     "Are you a member of the A. P. A.?"
     "I am a member of nothing."
     This caused laughter which was promptly suppressed by the court.

Samuel BRADLEY of Genesee street was called.
     "Was there an occasion when you rode with Johnny CURVIN in a car up Monroe avenue and he told you he had been a witness before the grand jury?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "Did Johnny tell you that if CHATFIELD hadn't shot him KEARNS would have knocked his damned head off; all he wanted was one swipe?"
     "He did."

George F. TAYLOR of Plymouth avenue swore the reputation of Dominick KEARNS as to quarreling was bad.
     "What was his reputation as to his fighting fair or foul?"
      Objection by Mr. WARREN.
     The court - "Is there a distinction?"
     There is," Said Mr. RAINES.  "The gang gouged eyes, kicked, threw stones, used any weapons that were handy."
The question was changed to ask the witness if the reputation of KEARNS was that of a desperate fighter.
     Witness said it was that of a man who would kick a man to pieces.
In answer to questions witness said that in a conversation with CHATFIELD some time before the shooting he told him to keep away from the KEARNS and SLATTERY gangs; that if he remained in his place he would get a stone or club in the head.
     "Was there a time when you were at work painting a house in Charlotte and CHATFIELD was working on the carpenter work?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "How did CHATFIELD work?"
"He was in a hurry to get back to Rochester and worked one Sunday.  At noon he stopped, saying his back had given out.  Another time he stopped lathing because he said his wrists were swelled."
     Witness told of other similar occasions and testified that young CHATFIELD once said he would leave home because his father was always grumbling that he couldn't do work enough.
     Mr. WARREN - "You have belonged to the A. P. A.?"
     "I belonged to it about two years ago.  I was a member for about a year."
     "Lodge 10."
     "Where does it meet?"
     "In Sargent Hall."
     "Was there not something in the oath you took that would prevent you from testifying against CHATFIELD?"
     "No, sir.  The oath you stated the other day was false."
     "You heard the witness testify that he took that oath?"
     "He was under a misapprehension."
     "Can you produce the ritual containing the oath?"
     "I cannot."
     "You took an oath to do all in your power to put down Catholicism?"
     "No, sir."
     "Something to that effect?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "To put down the pope?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "Did you take an oath never to vote for a Catholic?"
     "I never took that oath."
     "Can you go into the organization without taking all the oaths they administer?"
     "You can."
     "How many oaths did you take?"
     "I don't know."
     "One, two, three or four?"
     "As many as that."
     "Are there more than that?"
     "I do not know."
     "Did you take an oath to consult only Protestants and to make nothing known to Catholics?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "Not to employ Catholics?"
     "I didn't take that."
     "Never to contribute to the support of any Catholic institution and to break down the power of the pope?"
     "No, sir."
     "It was read to you?"
     "I evaded it."
     "It was read to you and it was supposed you said yes, so they continued to read the others?"
     "Yes, sir."
     "That is the way you got into the organization, by evasion and artifice?"
     "Perhaps."
"If you have never read the ritual why are you ready to swear it was a false oath that the witness OAKLEY testified to yesterday."
Mr. RAINES objected and there was a discussion as to just what witness said.  The point was dropped without a direct reply.
     Mr. WARREN next asked witness if he had sworn to an oath to take up arms if necessary against the Papacy.
     "I do not remember," was the replay.
     "If you didn't you evaded it?"
     "All that I got around I evaded that way."
      At this point a recess was taken to 2 p. m.

When court re-convened at 2 o'clock this afternoon, Mr. TAYLOR's cross-examination was continued.  There was a noticeable increase in the attendance of ladies.
     "Mr. TAYLOR," asked Mr. WARREN, "you stated you were at CHATFIELD's when the defendant and his father had some trouble?"
     "Bert said he was going away because his father found fault for his not working hard enough."
     "Nothing was said that day about the defendant's weak back?"
     "No, sir."
     Mr. RAINES - "Did you assume any obligation which would affect you in a trial of a case in court?"
     "No, sir."
      "You have employed Catholics since that time?"
     "Yes, sir."

Miss Louise Hillman was sworn.  Mr. RAINES said unless the district attorney withdrew his challenge the defense would feel called upon to produce in court one after another witnesses to show how KEARNS had fought on different occasions.
     Mr. WARREN said Mr. RAINES could ask his question and he would have a ruling of the court.
     Mr. RAINES then asked witness if she remembered an occasion when KEARNS, a man named QUINN and Henry BISNETT were at her home in Chili.
     Witness said she did.
Mr. RAINES said he wished to show that KEARNS then drove BISNET's team away, threw stones at the house and blacked Mrs. SCHUBERT's eyes when she objected.
     Questions as to these incidents were objected to by Mr. WARREN and the objection sustained.  Mr. RAINES announced that he had an abundance of evidence on this point but would not trouble the court with any more offers.

Thomas Fussey of Chili was sworn and asked about a fight in EISEMAN's saloon.  Objection by Mr. WARREN was sustained.
     Witness testified that Dominick KEARNS had a reputation for fighting foul. In cross-examining witness, Mr. WARREN tried to show that he was addicted to drinking.

Joseph JARVIS of Gates was sworn and asked of an alleged occurrence seventeen or eighteen years ago when he was struck by Dominick KEARNS in an assault. An objection by Mr. WARREN was sustained.
     Then Mr. WARREN withdrew his objection and witness said Dominick KEARNS struck him with a revolver. It appeared from further answers of witness that KEARNS caught the team of witness at the corner of Plymouth avenue and Magnolia street.  Witness chased KEARNS up the street.  KEARNS returned later and then struck witness with the revolver.
     "Who was with KEARNS when you first saw him?"
     "He was alone."
     "Who was in the sleight with you?"
     "Henry BISNETT _____"
     Mr. WARREN - "A good A. P. A."
     Mr. RAINES (angrily) _ "One moment.  You will get all you want without talking yourself."
Witness said a man named MCGOOGAN and the two QUINNs were also in the sleigh with him.
      "Did you think it queer that a highwayman should stop your team with six or seven men in your sleigh all your friends, and then run away when you chased him?" asked Mr. WARREN.
     "I didn't know whether it was murder or robbery that he wanted."
In answer to questions by Mr. RAINES witness said KEARNS tried to turn the horses down Magnolia street.  When KEARNS returned after being chased he had ten or eleven men with him. KEARNS pointed the revolver at witness and threatened to blow out his brains.  KEARNS then struck witness over one eye with the revolver, knocking him down and then kicking him.  Witness finally was able to get into his sleigh and escape by putting his horses on a run.
     Mr. WARREN - "Did you have him arrested?"
     "No, sir."
     "Why didn't you?"
     "I was afraid of the whole gang."
     "He nearly killed you that time?"
     "He might have done worse."
"Didn't you know that the best way to prevent him from doing it again was to have him arrested and sent up twenty years?"
     "I thought it was my business whether or not I had him arrested."
Mr. WARREN severely catechized witness as a law abiding citizen who had not caused the arrest of a man guilty of so atrocious a crime and assault as that alleged.
     Witness was asked by Mr. RAINES as to any of the gang now serving time and said Mike SLATTERY was.
Mr. RAINES and Mr. WARREN indulged in a controversy as to whether or not a charge of highway robbery is now pending against Pat SLATTERY.  Mr. RAINES said the gang was so strong that charges reach the district attorney's office and nothing more is heard of them.  S