| Show jl 11I Tn JIH i IT AW 7 fj O rnwrll llurr With Ant t o t John Vow ell charge f w o ult upon his fourteen W yearold st pdaughter wan to hav 1een Itl < < 1 today ulan mollon or A 1 I 1utnam n O j rl n nr 1 ittorncy Putnam In an affidavit for t ontlnuuncc no In forth that the State annofprocjed to trial at this 11m on 1J nconnl or lh Ilbn trom the 81llt j r t I tla dan J l oi nulted A ubpoeo wn Iued ror her nnd 1lneed In Ihe hond or the sheriff several weeks nso but nil efforts oh f i forts to locate tho girl 1 have been fruit i lens It was learned that Bhe was rtl1 III with I1n unrl In Aummll cOlin ty but the sheriff of that county has t 1110 been unble 10 10el1t hr Mr 1 1utnam believes she has been purposely pur-posely sent awo > by the defendint In order that shs lOllY not unify against f him Attorney II A Amlth dmd tho n Igatlon nboutely alld ovpoed the motion on the following grounds nul the affidavit does not 1 how that the testimony Is I umula tlve econd l1t1davll do nlt how 110111 the tollmony rouhl not be IIlven Ijll Ioy I1nother wltnc withIn tho Juri 1 j ot t r r 1 io tl t tllmony I matprlI rourth Ill11dovll M doe not state rnt 10 how that due diligence has been exercised to obtain the testimony of the witness fifth nf o Ddavll d not how thl1t the wltne i an I > 0 obtained to IIY nt thl or t xny other term of c o t Judga Norrell gra ntlo onllnuonre may h tOk to t Supm Htl 6 r |
