Delaware State journal and statesman. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1855-1870, 1863-06-30

mohd ! understand thar he lives in Wnshingto
city Mt present, and understand that he is doin
public busintss there.
No CO. Did you charge Hurley on your bOol
with any tickets delivered to him 3?
Answer. Mr.. Hurley was charged as all othe
chaser, but the unsold tickets being returned b
I him.
No Gl. We're those tickets delivered to him I
be sold at his place of business in Richmond Z
Answer The tickets were sent him by Adams
Express Co., to Richmond, to be sold by him,
not sold to be returned.
No. 62. suppose ticket were not beior
drawn, il returned would he be liable for tn
price
Answer. Certainly, he would be liable for ih
cost Of the ticket.
No. 63. Did any tickets delivered to hin
about the oath of October 1860 draw a prize; j
SO was it a half ticket drawing the prize 0
| $37 10000?
Answer. Yes sir, there was n half ticket il
the supply sent to Richmond which did draw th
half OF S37 10000, at the same time deny tina
the ticket was ever properly sold; the who'll
thing was fraud, | sent an agent to Richmond
to investigate ii after thorough investigation
by the agent was satisfied that it was II fraud
To more fully confirm the fraud Mr.. Hurley ant
his brother were in Wilmington they were a
.
adjoining heard loud conversation in the room
occupied by the HuTleys ii was in relation q
this lottery ticket one brother called the other
fool for having placed this Ticket in he bnnd9 oi
this lager beer dutchman; said that lhC
dntchman was stupid ltilow could nui
be trusted as he might not stick TO what ht
said Francis Hurley the cllimlht of the ticket
made the remark, let rs tnkc il from him ind
give 1t to somebody else, his ro,her remarked,
you are a fool or daho tol aud we will
have To stick to itas lA.... &c iu
ticket Hs "a maud.
No. ca. Who was the agent referred to in your
last answer?
Answer, The agent who went to Richmond
referred to in my last answer was Madison
Jefers
No. 60. Who were the persons who overheard
the conversation you refer to
Answer Mr.. James Murphy.
No. TT. In the assignment of the Lottery
franchise to Francis Morris, was there any con
sideration for such assignment other than the
payment of the sums named in schedule A?
Answer. | received no other consideration
than those named in schedule A. The arrange
ment was this it was volunteer assignment and
if the profits were $50, 100000, ten Of this
amount went to Mrs France and the residue
unto the creditors.
No. 67. Upon the dissolution of ofco-parlnership
formerly existing between you and Sephen
Broadbent sen, Stephen Broadbent Jr John
scottie Droadbeut aud Wm. Z. France, did you not
enter into articles Of agreement with the other
members OF the firm of France, Broadbent & Co.,
10 which you admitted an indebtedness on your
own part 10 said Stephen Broadbent? II so, to
what amount, and has that Indebtedness been
since paid, and how paid
Answer. No sir, never admitted any thing Of
the kind.
Ne. 6S. Are you not ind btcd to Stephen
Broadbent senior, Of the city of Baltimore and if
so, to what amount aud when due how was that
indebtedness created?
Answer. I don't owe Stephen Broadbent dol
lar.
No 50. Do you not own some stock in the
Junction and Bie kwater Rail Road Company
in possession, remainder or reyersion? or
does not some person or if any person who hold
said stock in the Raid Road Company in possess
sion or reyersion, and if you or any one for you
hold such stock what amount is SO held.
Answer do not own any stock now in the
sai i Junction aud Breakwater Rail Road, rans-
ferred it for subsisting debts.
No TO- Ia the affidavit you filed and the oath
you took before the honorable John W. Houston,
GU the 2Bth dny Of January A. d, 1859, upon
entering into bond aud surety under your Lottery
grant by the Legislature of this State. did you not
swear that you were then worth the sum of seven
hundred thousand dollars.
Answer do not recoect whether | took that
oath or not, but what sum sworc to | believed
was worth. The question is one easily answer
ed
No, IL. What arc the causes Of your having
become lusovent since January 26th 1869 vi
your sinking 80 large amount ofmoney as $780,
600 within 30 brief period as up to November
1862, or of your now being nsolvent 10 such large
amount noted in your petition &c.
Answer. When my co-partner Broadbent
went to Delaware and expended and spread
broadcast $3.50, 600 90 in obtaining the Lottery
privilege which | held, and spread broadcast
through Delaware bonds, notes aud other obga-
tons amounting to half a million more and the
large amount of money paid by me during the
20 months We were in partnership and the frauds
and fraudulent entries made by Broadbent in the
books kept by himself?
No. 72 Do you intend to say that you paid
the whole sum of $250,000, for the Delaware
Lottery grant?
Answer All that can say is that paid what
Broadbent said he had paid for the grant.
4 No. 49, Was not Stephen Broadbent, senior,
partner with you in the Lottery gr4ut, did Lu
not bear the share of his expenses Of that grant,
Answer. BrOadbent never paid cent for any
thing.
No. "A. Look upon this paper and state
whether the card therein published headed
especial notice" 'To the public and signed Il.
France was published with your knowledge and
consent?
Answer. | desire TO make an explanation in
regard to this matter. This card was signed by
me, the grand jury of Baltimore city had indicted
Mr.. Broadhent o writs; aud which Judgements
were quashed Mr. Lanahan the counsel Of Mr.
Broadbeut, pleading the act of Limitations; not
being wiling TO meet the merits of the case
before the court in having Mr. Broadbent indict-
ed, acted under the advice Of my counsel 10
Baltimore had repeatedly urged my counsel
during the year previous to allow me to 90 be
fore the grand Jury; his answer invaribly was, il
is time enough it is not time yet, we may
force them into II settlement after tie year was
cut Mr.. White my counsel said that l might 60
before the grand Jury, aud so advised; a bitter
feeling existed between Mr.. Broadbent and my
self and Mr. Lanahau there had been no com
municaton passed between us until about the
date Of that card. Mr.. Jcifers, was in Baltimore
few weeks previous to that time there had also
been an i'll feeling existing between MIR. Jeiters
and Mr. Brosdbent; one evening MIR. Broadbent
called on Mr.. Jeilers; took him by the hand re-
maj ked let by-gones be by zones; there has been
ain III feeling between US Tor Il long while aud
desire to have it buried, words 10 that effect;
desire to bury the Ratchet may have been his
words. In the course OF conversation with MIR,
Jciers Mr.. Broadbeut introduced my name; spoke
of nc very kindly remarked that if he could
bring about Il reconciliation between himself and
me that he would be able TO save u large portion
ofmy property for me; he said he had been fleesed
by note shayers and robbed TO a very large
amount by them; that ii Mr.. Jetfers would bring
about a reconciliation between us that | should
not be sacrificed; Mr.. Jeilers came to see me on
fi,a rnhipcf and aftpr VariOus communications
between us finally agreed that would meet
Mr.. Broadhent in Baltimore. The meeting took
place Mr., Broadbent coming to my house he met
.nraa " LII hall, hnnl. sall LL.nL