New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1864-12-23
TIE WEED.0PDYHE LIBEL SUIT.
Close Of Defendants Testimony.
SUPREME C0URT-Dkc. ". -


Q. State the Government contracts ycn nay 'nat MI
Opdyke rt any time became connected with or hau
ANYTHING 20 do wthi A. In the Spring OF 1877 haa
contract With the Government to furnish them iOO,V
army COATS made Of piecedyed blue cloths 1t was made
with Ouarternaster Gresham. Of Philadelphia; that
the only contract had ia which Dir. Opdyke vas
when L sold that contract TO Mr. Opdyke
at the same time negotiated sale TO Mr.. Opdyke OF
The contract which Mr.. Hitchcock had for coo coa
of the same kind; when my brother and TOOK tno
contract for 10 600 coats we Designed ng m cn1d moi
dnd the goods the contract called for. Ogectloh 70
wfat his brother told him) Mr. Opdyke had NE eoous
and could not buy the goods OF hr; oplyke q, az.
price that would answer cnr purpose; went 10 ar.
0pdyke and negotiated the sale OF the contract dIree5
10 him.
o. Why did Won sell your contract to Mr.. Op1yke,
(Obeced to- There was no allegation IN the psi u''
Mr.. Opdyke he'd eli tho oloil)
Direction sustained. 80, ~
o. What was the sale and agreement win MI W
dyke, A. 4 simply sold the contract or caused the
contract 10 be assigned TO Mr.. Opdy ke Tor when 10
vas 10 pay me con liberation Of one shilling coat on
tie &C. O0 on the other 1900 coats ne was 10 pay VIC
same prices received nom MT opI!A9 1n,a.Io5 sc
count with Mr. Opdykc; my brother took the claim
from nc, and paid re for my interest. 49,.
these two roptracts with the Government A. To the
best Of my knowledge and belief be DID, or caused
10 be done; the contract filed 10 tho Government
The delivery WGs made IN Philadelphia AAu holinb
20 do with the completion Of the contract ,,
q DO Won know about my Other contract mat mi.
Opdyko had with the Government a. NO. SIR hoihiHs
DISCRIMINATION You sny the cloths to be used
for fling these two contracts with me OoVefnmeh,
could not be found IN the market Did you seek TO rhu
them vonrselfi a. My impression IS that old' uul
mot to tho extent ny brother did; he made the M
cuires chiefly; abandoned the IDA oi getuhs NC
cloth; can't cay If inquired OF two estabshnehts ~
Newiork for the olotns; MI. UpGyke hn pioOe ~
cloths; ! don't know whether got the iniofIIH,i,h
from seeing the goods or from couyersat'on WIN NJ
Opdvke, cant cay that had conversation with MI
opdke about purchasing We fGoG or a tbai se
coqd negotiate the contract with Mr. Opdyke but IS
il was In nv name he wished mo 20 consninhae ~
have had other contracts with the Goyernment lor
clothing did not manufacture the germeuts myself
bu, ordered them 20 be filled by arrangement WIN
clothing merchants took contracts then made arrange
uents 10 furnish thocot TO tailors 10 DC MADE up am
delivered them in Philadelphia aud got PAID Tor them'
made contracts with Others 10 make them up at so
much garment; always earned out hnch contracts .!
means OF suh-contracts with others
Redrect.-p. Did you carry our tie contract You
sod Opdy in tie way you carried ont the oilers
4. No.
the sale OF this contract with MI. opdyke.
Cross cxamined.-I DO not manufacture clothing my.
self have had good many contracts with Govern ment
for clothng in one contract for 4OpO pairs nnioTm
pent, toned Mr. Carhart IN the contract for the Pur
pose Of making them, and divided profit, after eT.
pepses; in oil other contracts had with Government
sublei OF hired the garments made by contract III
the contract sold ~ Opdyke for - 90 coats the trans
lev. we're made to Mr. Carhart and Mr. smith; no
transfer 70 Mr. Opdyke; there was mistake made IN
making TIE transfer; Mr.. Opdyko reqne-tcd mo 70
20 10 Philadelphia ard have the IL 900 coufs Transferred
70 Mr. Carhsrt and the other l2om 10 SmitHi e.theI
through my mistake the rIsiase 81 Tue clerk therr
the 600 was transferred 70 Smith, aud TIC lNy ~
Carhart; don't know who made the excess OF 4VVo
eass snppose u was Mr.. Smith; almost all the con-
tracts han with Government were made win quarter
master Crossman lad one from another tluarieFmas
ter; Mr. Weed did not have anything % DO win thos"
contracts, with my getting themi dif not Know
Mr. Weed at tha. times ny acquaintance Win nm has
been made since.
O. Did YOU know anything about IN EFFORT made TO
remove Quartz General Aiegs, and have Col
Crossuan appointed in hi, plsce' COhJccted 70. or
frcd 10 show the wituosss relations WITH w Wcedl
Admitted. a. No. cir neror heard anything about
II; 1 knew there WINS dissatisfaction with Mr.. Megs
but never heard u amy effort 20 put Col Crossman In
Ills place. after transferred the contract for coats TO
Mr. oPdyke. felt We had nothing moir To do WIN ~
did nothing more; brt whom In fhgac!psia urged
the goods being passed through
Henry j. Spalding sworn. Examined ny deiindnhts
COUNSEL en- "A commission merchant OF the hrm Of
Spading IiuBt.S Co.; commission merchants In wooden
goods; have been in tie cloth business 20 year, am
familiar with 1t; know Mr. opdyke IN the Autumn
OF IsCI l sold 10 Mr.. Opdyke a quantity, somewhere
about 5000 verbs Of doeskins, in TIE white or graz
state prepared for dycing but not dyed; Mr. OJdyke
inside contract 10 my presence ~iih man named
blue; they not dyed In indigo bue Jllging Iom
some Of the goods had occasion 10 look NJ AFTER they
were dyed they we're dyed With competition; there
m gbt have been indigo in them. but hcy were not ac
cordlny 10 the contracts th. dye very inferior o. m
dgo.bue; Judge IL was very bad dye from tho fno
that Mr. Opdyke claimed from NO dollar a cost on
900 hat were rejected: don't know Why hey were
rejected; guaranteed that the merchandise hpd MI
Opdyke was capable Of taking good indgobuei the
goods we've made up by Carhert q saith Mr' opn!ks
said the goods capable Of taxing the dye, aud
that was where the controversy arose between To; br
Opdyke told me 1000 coats were rejected ana made
clGtn or me for ~ coat, because tLey bad beeh'Ie
iected and would not pass.
O. DO you know whether these were the 1000 costs
that were attempted 10 DO got In ut Philadelphia A.
do not IL takes about ,! yards o. coat IN the con
dition sold tie cloth II phs ejo. yard.
q. Did yon pay this claim of a. II coat 20 Mr.. Op-
dytef A. No, Mr.. Opdyko withheld tho money that
wac due 10 me the cioh ard eIdca'ored 20 do az
generally do 10 tuch matters-lo get oIt "i u VAN
compromise; consented to adjust II, by allowing
$500.
Cross. exanned-Ths goods 7 sold 70 Mr.. Opdyke
rere nv own hongbt them Of the manufacturer after
having sold them 70 SIR Opdyke 1 sold them by
ule and then went 80 Burlington W.. and bought tho
goods; did not tell Mr. Opdykc that they we're goods
consigned 10 me; the contract nade Win nm was ior
80 OO0 yards; oant say how much dehycred; the
contract 20 dye the cloth was made With Mr. Scott In
nv store; Mr. Scott said he could dyo the goods; In
.-odnced him Ia Mr.. Opdyke; hr. Scott had becn a
dyer Of cotton goodsons Of the bert cotton dyers;
was discussed whether he could dye HOoens thought
he could tie goods sold were not detective. IN my
opnon, Hr Opdyke claimed that they were; be told me
some Of the goods aierwrrd sent 10 staten Island
dyeing establishment 10 be dyed over; | know they
were no; indgo-dyed by Scott because sent strips to
the manufacturer and they came back TO me stripped
OF color and nearly IN the state In which they were
delivered o Mr Opdyke. which is proof that they were
good ndigo-bue; ny impression Is That ini Vac
afterw ard seat 10 Staten Island was Indigo dyed bni
Tire goods bedevoed before that by Scott that
they could not he made good color
O. Did not Opdykc make the contract with Scott "a
dye the goods before he told sou he would take them
A. Nj Opdy 90 told me he world take tbe goods pro-
yided be could got them dyed; there We're 20 many
traus actions OF the nature IL difficult 10 gel
them dyed; suggested 10 Nh Scott and lie converted
with hin.
Q. How much did you deduct from your bin 10 conse
nnenne II LLla nllcrnl INN. rlectinni A Not