The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-01-20
THE CHIEF OF POLICE.
Testimony or Mr.. sedgw1ck, Miss Ann Roc,
Reeves b. sel1nes aAd sSepheA n. Branch
Anidav1ts, &c.

AMdavits, &c.
FIFTH DAY.
The investigation was resumed yesterday, the
whole Board of Commissioners being present. The
Mayors Office was crowded, showing that the In
terest of the case has not died out notwithstanding
the protracted length to whchit has been extended
Mr.. Noyes counsel for the prosecution, offered
the following affidavit Of Mrs. ann B. Cudhpp which
was read on the investigation before the Police
Committee Of the Board of Aldermen
J. Ann b. Cuolipp depose-ihat was born 10 Ports
MONTH England, IN 1901; that daughter Of Thomas
Sparshost, and sister of Elisabeth Kervan Of Bioouag
ssdscp srs IN isa7 from fo4 nou,S England 70 MS1
that there was = family paued Matset- board thai
Mr. Mafell had wife board that ne aad two dough
t.rs board, named MarJ and Sus9n that he - three
sons on board named William Mauell, George w, Nat
sell and Augustus Mstsen; these thee Wiliam,
ter TINT william about Dineteen, that George W.
was about seven or eight years old snas there was
sa or s % ea
and put into Halifax for provisions
Sworn to before me this seventh day Of Apd lst5.
THOMAS PEARSON, Justica OF tie Seventh District.
Yo4EvILiE, April Z, 1866.
The first witness examined was:-
Mr.. Theodore Sedgwick. who testified rs follows:-
I reside in thiscity, and am counsellor -atlaw.
Q. VIII you state whether you saw any book.
while In England, puiporting TO be q parish record
Of baptism in Brandon, Suffolk county, England
Objected to by Mr.. Brady, on the ground that the
record should be produced first
Mr. Noyes contended that 1t testified to by COM
petent Witnesses it was admissible, although the re-
cord itself might not be produced. a sworn copy
was admissible, he argued. md cited COweu
HIS notes, GIG, l,l47 and ,l49.
Mr.. Brady objected, as there was no legal proof
that the record was authentic.
Witness resumed-I was in London in July and
August last year; on some day during that period
was at Mr.. Buchanan's Office gentleman whom
bod M nfh huy hut vvho
was MIR Branch, introduced himself to me;
he showed me book entitled " The Parish Record
of Baptism for the Parish Of Brandon and gave
him the following certifcate-
Icerfy that MIR. Stephen II. Branc ss this day pro-
duced tefre me, at the rerioence ST he Hoo. James
Buchanan, Envoy Extaor .ibary an Minister penpo
ley street, a volume In manuscript, on pArchment
which tho said Mr. Braph represen 70 Sne a. bsing the
original register Of ssptisros for the ps,sh OF Bandon
that the said manuscript volume CONTAINS under the
head Of "Rsp isms, 1911" the fslowiog worca:-
"GeoIge son Of G.oge Mstsel srd Elizabeth his xe,
baptized, privately, Oct. iosh and received Dec
Goth" have given Mr.. Branch this certificate at his
request. THEODORE SEDGWfCK.
iospcs, Avg. ., 1856.
Witness resumed--The volume was rather thin
folio volume, in manuscript, on parchment, If it
states so in my affidavit; It did not strike me as
very old or very new looking volume; think Mr.
If Mr.. Buchanan saw 1t, it was v thout my know.
ledge: / thiUk Mr.. Branch was alone.
Crossexamined by Mr. Brady did not witness
any interview between Mr. Buchanan and Mr..
Branch the book which he showed Inc was OPEN
1t bound book; should say the record Of the
baptism was in the middle OF the page or not;
~ 1s sssa = 80 "a |s{ \. ~
did; Mr.. Branch came in after arrived at Mr..
Buchanans Office; was kept waiting some time to
see Mr.. Buchanan.
Miss Ann Roe, sworn, testified as follows II re.
side in Broadway; I resided near Niblo's between
1s14 and 1924; recollect family living near me
named Matsell Mr.. Matsell was tailor; did not
gee him often; knew his two eldest daughters,
Susan and Mary; knew there were three boys,
William, George and Augustus.
Mr.. Reeves Selmes, sworn, testified as foll0ws:-
During the last summer occupied the position of
Second Assistant Clelk to the Board OF Aldermen;
have rongh minutes Of the evidence given before the
Police Committee; the papers which have in my
hand are copies of the Brandon records and the re-
port of the con mttee to tue Board of Aldermen.
Stephen II. Branch. sworn. testified az follows -
reside in New York; lived in New York since
wasSleyen years old: went to England to ascer.
tain the birthplace of Geo. w. Matsell; left the
United States on July lS 1866: went first to Liver
pool from there to Brandon very circuit ,usly, which
Is on the line of Norfolk and Suffolk counties.
Q. What led you to go to Brandon?
Objected to by MIR. Brady, on the ground that the
motive was not evidence. Sustained by the Court.
Witness went there from statement made by
village of about 1000 inhabitants; first saw the
parish clerk whom l found about two rods from his
residence; he YVES pointed out to me; his name is
Charles Farrow, and be is about As years Of age.
Objected to by Mr.. Brady
The Court said that he should state facts.
Witness-He (the sexton) directed me to
60 to London, where the rector was: the
and the other in London; ] went from
Brandon London, and found the rector there; his
name was Samuel Warren; he directed me to return
to Brandon and go to the rectoria mansion; knew
he was the rector, because he told me so.
Mr. Brady objected to the testimony which was
sought to be introduced on the ground that there
was no proof Of its authenticity. There was no
proof, for instance, that the person Mr. Branch
spoke TO was the rector, except his own statement
1t was all hearsay from beginning TO end--book,
sexton, rector, all was hearsay. In order to intro
duce any record they had to bring proof rreirsgbie
that that record was authentic.
Mr.. Stoughton, counsel Tor prosecution, contended
that the manner in which these documents came
before the Court was in accordance with the rules
of evidence.
The City Judge said that evidence might be ad-
mitted now and ruled upon afterwards.
Mr. Brady objected, and said he claimed that Mr.
Branch know nothing about the matter, and would,
when cross-eXamning, endeav0r to prove il.
The Recorder ruled in favor of Mr.. Brady. He
thought this testimony could not be introduced with
out first proving the authenticity OF the records. He
for one would prefer bearing the authorities and
argument OF the counsel before deciding this question.
His Honor the Mayor said this was a court not
trammelled by techuicalities. He was only in
search of facts, and would exclude no evidence
whatever. He would admit it all. My colleagues
here are lswyers am not, and must defer to them,
if they rule against me. bit ! hope they will unite
with me ia admitting it all. There is no appeal in
this court.
The Recorder said the very fact that there was no
apl cal from this Court led him to be guided BY the
well settled principles Of law which had been fixed
after the experience Of ages. He would prefer that
the members OF the Court should have consultation
together before deciding this question.
Mr. Stoughton said, IL discussion and authorities
were necessary, he hoped an opportunity wonld be
given them to produce the authorities.
City Judge Cspron said the remarks Of the Mayor
seemed very reasonable. Equity and justice had
great weight with him. He For one should prefer
argument, but he thought we could admit the eyi.
dence subject TO argument, but be would leave this
for the decision Of his colleagues.
The Recorder said 1t would save time to adjourn
Mr. Brady-Then before adj0crning we can call
Ofher VZitrassaa Il a XitneSa mYSalf-