Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1859-04-08

conceived 70 be the dirty d shs District Attorney
in such cases, nor did he exRct 20 know, certain
s.%.sicn NJ Rsieiids sSGaeht i The Is.rict
go Iso:sns about the grand sFy
nesses were to 60 before grand jury as volun-
tecn In any case he knew more than The speaker
knew or ever int nded to know.
60 to tue gentleman for information in this Of any
other matter He chose bis own counsellors. He
would state, Tor his satisfaction, that he did not
summon Mr.. Butterworth to go before the grand
jury. for reasons which he had not disclosed and
should not disclose hereafter. TSensation.1
tPrior to the settlement Of this question its dis
cussion was suspended for few moments while
the Judge LETT the room.l
Mr.. Ould proceeded to show why these witnesses
were not summoned. How does the other side
know, said he. that these witnesses were not called
before the grand jury in reference to this matter Of
Mr.. Sickles's, but in reference to another matter
which shall be nameless.
He commended that there was no proof that these
parties have ever been used before the grand jury
In any case efectng the life and safety Of Daniel
E. Sickles.
Mr.. Magruder followed, claiming that II was
the bounden duty Of the Government to summon
the Government a. well as the object of Justice
was that all the facts should be elected The de-
fence was asking for nothing new here. II had
been so ruled by the very highest authorities.
I'M 10
show that all the witnesses on the back of the bin
should be called, II for no purpose of the prose-
euuon, for the purpose of crOss-examination and
also to show that even though the names were not
on the back OF the bill they had been called. and
their examination insisted on by the learned
Judge. Also, from 9th Darlington as to the same
point. '. .1E II - -
Sc far as Mr.. Butterworth was concerned II
was In evidence that he was present at the kill
ing. Why was he not called on by the United
states to appear here and give his evidence. The
Government did not stand here to call for a VIC
tim. IL this course should be adopted by the
Government it would deny the humble citizen
the right to fair trial. which the laws of the Land
and the rules Of courts accord him. . b.
Ii was true that Butterworth was not before the
grand jury. but he was witness before the coro-
ner's inquest. Woodbridge was before the grand
jury. as was shown by the affidavit of one OF the
grand jurors. Why then was he not here in court
as witness regularly returned by the District At
torney! ... -. ...-.. -.
This course denied to the defence the right to
confront the witnesses who were before the grand
jury on the part of the United States. Upon every
ground of common sense and Justice the defence
bad the right TO examine these witnesses, and
should not be denied those rights
ItcannOt be denied that Woodbridge was regarded
as witness of the United States Else why was
he before the grand jury so with the case of
Butterworth, who must have been considered as a
witness for the Government. or else why was the
prisoner at the bar incarcerated in the Jail on his
testimony, as was shown to be the case by the
commitment of the magistrate.
Mr.. Carlisle followed on the part of the United
States, asking first . Who is Mr.. Butterworth -
and answering by giving history of his associa-
ton with the prisoner at the killing of Key. He
proceeded by asking if Mr. Buttefworth had on
oath charged Daniel r.. Sckles with the murder
Of Philip Barton Key. Had he ever done so IL
was not within his MIR. Carlisles) knowledge.
The testimony of Butterworth charges sickles
with killing Philip Barton Key, which is not the
crime for which the prisoner at the bar is being
tried.
Of man taken in the act of standing over the
bdoy of his victim, and his confederate by his
side. He would suppose such a case That the
United States in such case should be hopelessly
welded to this witness, would shock common
sense.
The speaker had felt a thrill of horror when Mr..
Radcliffe had stated in his argument that in the
case of Edwards, quoted by him. certain witnesses
best known to themselves. Those same witnesses
who were before the grand jury. the speaker had
every reason to believe, were deemed to bannn-
worthy of belief Those witnesses Were twowo-
men OF ill fame, and Were called to the stand by
direction Of the Court, and cross-examined by the
gentleman who has just quoted the case and the
speaker would do him the justice to say that
more tender examination, nor a more COMPLIANT
witness, he had never seen. Laughter
The Court decided adversely to summoning
ButterwOrth as a Government witness on the
ground that the United States was bound by
the action of the Coroner in summoning But
terworth at the Coroners jury, and that the
affidavit Of Butterworth upon which Sickles
was committed, was a friendly act probably done
to prevent any thorough investigation at the time.
The application as regards Woodbridge and Wal
ker was refused, they not having been present at
the shooting.
Brady stated that he understood that the United
States had got through their evidence in chief,
and supposed that now of course they would in
future he confined TO rebutting proof.
The Court answered that this was So
The business of the day now closed. and after
through the day had somewhat thnned. the jury
in charge of bailffs retired to their room at the
National Hotel. The prisoner was remanded, and
the court adjourned.
The Stars REPORT OF THE CoRoSER's In
QUEsT.-In the course of his cross-examination
yesterday, a witness in the Sickles case, Mr..
Edward Delafield, jr., disputed the accuracy Of
the Stars report Of his testimony given before the
Coroner's jury over the body OF the late Philip
Barton Key. wherein that is alleged to conflict
with his testimony given i'm the courthouse.
We have to say that the report of the testimony
taken before the Coroner's jury published in the
Star ION the day sfter,) was written by member
Of the Washington bar, and accorded TO the Star
office by way of verifying the accuracy of the
report made by the editor Of the Star in person. at
the same time, Of course. 1t was duly compared
with the latter report, with which II agreed in all
particulars. Being written in a more lcgible hand
than the report made by the editor of the Star, 1t
was used In preference TO that.
We submit to an intelligent public whether,
under such circumstances, it is not more likely to
be faithful transcript of the testimony Of this
young gentleman on that occasion, than his rccol-
lection of 1t under the embarrassing rOssexamin-
alton at this late day, Of acute counsel.
Pollen MArTERs.-Befors JHSfis, DonH-John
McGowan got very drunk, and staggering along
the streets fell on the pavement east Of the City
Hall and cut his head. Officer Narrower put him
in furniture wagon and conveyed him to the
Office of Justice Dom, obtained the necessary
and had him hauled out to the city
farm to spend the ensuing three months in the
service.
John Bell, colored, and John Bailey, white,
were taken to the office by Officer Yeatman Bal
ley complained that Bell had assaulted him.
witness testified that the two were cart drivers,
and person went to the stand to employ driver.
Bailey and Bell got into controversy about push
ing each other when asking the job, and Bailey
called Bell - a Id black son Of b-h. % w here
upon Bell, in order to prevent his coming any
closer during the controversy, stretched out his
arm suddenly and pushed Bailey in the mouth.
ustice Dom fined Bailey 81 "a FOR profanity and
disorderly conduct and Bell SO "a for his offence
Before Justice C7ark.-Yesterday, Officers Fam
ming and Ecklof arrested the following list Of fe-
males for INDUCING in profane swearing; and the
reader may justly infer from the reputation Of
Of the batch that there was some cussin' done by
them: Catharine Campbell col; fine and costs,