Illinois vs. August Spies et al. trial transcript no. 1 Direct examination by Mr. Foster. Testified through an interpreter. Testified on behalf of the Defense, Spies, August et al. Saw witness William Seliger (vol.I 506-546) at witness Sophia Glumm's (vol.L, 511-515) home. Attempted to testify that Seliger told Glumm that his statements made to the police were untrue, and they had been extorted from him under threats and the promise of the reward of his liberty.
Testimony of Hermine Gehriger, 1886 Aug. 4.
Volume L, 515-517, 3 p.
Gehriger, Hermine.
Go to Next Witness | Return to Previous Witness | Return to Trial TOC | Return to the HADC Table of Contents
[Image, Volume L, Page 515]
HERMINIE GEHRIGER,
A WITNESS CALLED AND SWORN ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS, WAS EXAMINED IN CHIEF BY MR. FOSTER, AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
|THIS WITNESS EXAMINED THROUGH INTERPRETER GAUSS.|
Q WHAT IS YOUR NAME?
A HERMINIE GEHRIGER.
Q HAVE YOU A HUSBAND?
A YES SIR.
Q WHAT IS HIS NAME?
A FERDINAND GEHRIGER.
Q DO YOU KNOW MR. WILLIAM SELIGER?
A YES SIR.
Q DO YOU KNOW MRS. GLUMM?
A YES SIR.
Q DID YOU SEE MR. SELIGER AT MRS. GLUMM'S HOUSE IN THE MONTH OF MAY?
A YES SIR.
Q HOW NEAR DO YOU LIVE TO MRS. GLUMM?
A I LIVE AT VAN HORN STREET, AND SHE LIVES AT TWENTY SECOND STREET.
Q HOW FAR IS THAT?
A PERHAPS FOUR OR FIVE BLOCKS.
Q HOW OFTEN DID YOU SEE AND TALK WITH MR. SELIGER DURING THE TIME THAT HE LIVED AT MRS. GLUMM'S HOUSE IN MAY?
A TWICE.
Q Q I WILL ASK YOU WHAT MR. SELIGER SAID IN EITHER OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS AT MRS. GLUMM'S HOUSE, IF ANYTHING, IN REGARD TO ANY WRITTEN STATEMENT THAT HE HAD MADE TO THE OFFICERS?
OBJECTED TO.
THE COURT: SAVE THE POINT.
DEFENDANTS THEN AND THERE EXCEPTED TO THE RULING OF THE COURT.
MR. FOSTER: NOW, WE OFFER TO PROVE BY THIS WITNESS THAT MR. SELIGER TOLD MRS. GLUMM AND TOLD THE WITNESS IN THE PRESENCE OF EACH OTHER THAT HIS STATEMENTS MADE TO THE OFFICERS WERE NOR TRUE; THAT THEY HAD BEEN EXTORTED FROM HIM UNDER THREATS AND THE PROMISE OF THE REWARD OF HIS LIBERTY, IF THEY WERE MADE AND TESTIFIED TO.
THE COURT SUSTAINED THE OBJECTION TO THE QUESTION. TO WHICH RULING OF THE COURT DEFENDANTS COUNSEL THEN AND THERE EXCEPTED.