The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-04-22
WASHINGTON, April 81, 1859.

LUMBlA-JUDGE THOS. II. CRAWFORD.
PRESIDING.
WASHINGTON, April 81, 1859.
The Court opened at 1O.l5 A. NJ.
Judge Crawford remarked that he had received a
letter for Mr. Wilson, of the jurors postmarke ed
"New York" His clerk had recognized the hand
writing as that of business correspondent in that
city, and he would, if no objection was made, send
it to the juror.
Counsel interposing objection, the letter was
handed to Mr.. Wilson.
In a short time the letter was handed back, the
juror stating that he did not know the party from
whom 1T came, and thought it ought not to be re-
ceived.
Judge Crawford then read it and handed it over
to the counsel, remarking that it related to this
trial exclusively, and proceeded from the worst mo-
tive. 1t was an unwarranted and impertinent at
tempt to interfere with the of Justice and he
! would like very much to have the author exposed
and punished
Counsel then read the letter and agreed with the
Court In the animadversions which had been passed
upon it.
The Court asked what disposition should be made
of it. He thought it better probably that it
should go into the hands of the District A.tor-
Mr.. Carlisle thought that as it was addressed to
his Honor's care the Court had probably better
| take it in charge
| The Court however, declined to do so, and di-
rected that it should be placed in the hands of the
| District Attorney. He would have it DESTROYED
| but that he desired to have the author punished
| Mr.. Stanton desired to show it to the prisoner,
and also to compare the handwriting with some
letters in their possession which was assented to-
| Mr.. Brady said that yesterday proposition was
made on the part of the prosecution. In response
he had to say that his associates and himself were
unanimously agreed in rejecting the offer of the
United States. They had closed their case and the
United States POul1 wi fhaIu
Mr.. Ould directed Mr.. DOYLE to be re. called
| Mr.. Doyle testifed-I went for the coroner i'm
mediatey after the body of Mr.. Key brought
| to the Club house.
Mr.. Brady objected was not rebutting tes-
timony but was going over the whole ground again.
1t was now their turn to insist upon the rules OF
evidence being strictly adhered to.
MIR. Ouid had no objection to the defence taking
| this course. What they about to do was to
explain how the letters of Mr.. Key came into the
hands OF Mr.. Pendleton and DR.. Miller.
Mr.. Phillips said that the defence having closed
| their testimony, the prosecution had no right ia
introduce additional evidence in regard to matters
which had only been partially elucidated by the
| original examination of witnesses for the govern
ment To conduct case in this way would lead to
the result that it would never come to an end; for
every witness who had been called might be re-
| called and re-examined.
Mr.. Brady said that Mr.. Pendleton had yester-
day emphatically and Indignantly repudiated the
idea OF canceling any testimony in this case mpor-
tant or unimportant. He had stated that he had
certain articles belonging to Mr.. Key in his custo-
dy and had communicated that fact at an early day
to Mr.. Carlisle; now, If the United States had not
| brought the circumstance out it was their fault
| Mr. Carlisle denied ever having been informed
that these papers were found on the person of Mr..
| Key; they were handed him with others which he
knew were not on Mr. Keys body at the time Of
the homicide.
Mr.. Phillips resumed, laying down the rules with
regard to the examination of witnesses. The OBJ
lection was now made, not on account of the value
| q he in but tasa daptfo for tha fu
.ture conduct of this trial. He cited Darlington
Payne, to sustain his objection, and read a case
| therein.
Mr.. Carlisle did not controvert thelaw laid down
nor the general principle; but this was not par.
allel case. The defence meant to argue that al
| other things were found on Keys person besides
those given to the coroner for safekeeping, it nigh
| be that still other things were found This wit
ness was introduced in regard to the matter frs
brought out by an examination of witness for th,
defence. 1t was to meet and explain new anC
substantive fact in the cause, introduced by tn,
defence.
Mr.. Brady said if these matters were releyan
the prosecution should have introduced witnesses
first, in regard to them; if they were irrelevant
the prosecution should have objected to the intro
ducton Of evidence respecting them when offere,
by the defence. This their dilemma. Th
prosecution had undertaken to prove that every
thing had been presented which was found on til
person of Mr.. Key; but the defence had shown tn
contrary. This shows that the person of Mr.. Ke
had been searched before the coroner came.
Mr.. Carlisle.-These articles were not foun,
until after the coroner's inquest, at about seve
o'clock In the evening; 20 am informed
Mr.. Brady replied if that was the case, they ough
to have been informed of it before
, The Court decided that the evidence of these pa
pers had been introduced by the defence for tn
first time, and that this evidence now proposed t
meet that is rebutting evidence and is admissible
but must be confined exclusively to that.
Witness examination resumed.-About thre
nours after the coroner's inquest, DR.. Miller, MI
Greenleaf, the navy agent, witness and some otbe
: persons were present; some one examined tt
clothes, and said there were some papers, witnes
requested Dr. Miller to take charge of them, an
send them to Mr.. Keys family; did not have them
: my hands at all; people had previously been in an
+ had access to the clothes they pleased; the bod
, was then there; first saw the papers in DR.. Miller
8 hands, after they had been handed to him; witne
the persons present when the papers were foun