New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-06-23

the character gave Judge Brennan them and have Of
hn now ~ anu you nave no recoee9n saT nd
understand you then you have no recollection OF hearing
person in reference to Mr. Brennan's signing that
leasef A. l answer that as 1 answered be.
fore, that ] not only have no recollection, but
such conversation never occurred will state here the
only conversation ever heard that subject was one
wherein Mr. Williams was present, and he stated that ne
had information sufficient TO break MP this lease that he
thonght IT was wrong and that he could get employed
by the Corporation Counsel that he thought he would be
successful in breaking up then stated TO him that if
that was so he owed duty TO the public 10 try TO do it,
thereupOn went TO Mr. 0GOrman.
Mr.. Wliams-I do not want tins testimony taken I'M
less have an opportunity OF cOntradlcting II.
man and said believed he mt Wiliamsl was IN posses.
sion OF some information that might be useful TO the city,
the case, and that suggestion believe he re-
tanned. O. When did that conversation take pacei A
two years. O. Where did il take pacef A. have
recollection Of thatnO positive recollection but my I'M
preston is it was in railroad car. q. Was anybody
present hear that conversation beside you and met A
That cannot recOlee think there was some person
present can't say who; can't say what time of day IL
was; but can get at within day. O. How can you
get al ti A. BY getting at the date OF letter that MT
book-n some book that he had retained you,
or should retain you; that was the DAY
after the Conversations then going out OF town. ana
the next morning went down to him. was going to
Mr. Haskins the were I'm was gong up towns l
can't recOect the time of day any person that was in
the car mentioned the conversation 10 nobody but
Mr. O'GOrman. Q Did you tell Mr.. OGorman what [
had said, or at least give the language Wch you now
statel A. Nearly SOFAS nearly as recOllected il the
next morning. have had no conversation with any one
to what my testimony was to be IN the CASE IheVtr
knew of IL until few minutes ago, wheL an officer served
me with subpoena. q. Did you receive two letters
from met A. l received two letters this morning
at "a o'clock; don't know when they were writ
ten went ont OF town early Monday morning,
ahd returned at %, uhnk, last nGhti lhlS uoIA-
ing when up and opened my letters, among others
found your two e. We're 5hey PG.h SSiHS gUd d oc
OF them mentioned the person who was present win
whom you had the conversation which he9rdf A. les,
Sir Mr. Anderson q Inc lelIef delaeu lne caIgun
stances of which you made the statement IA my htrrE
4. Inever made any statement in your hearing e. Inc
versation TO which the letters refer, do they mott
testify to state of facts that had no existence.
Q. Was that the language ot the Ictteri A IN
eTi "a; s w, those itttcrs bcconse could not as
was at Newport or Providence, at some Of those
nv testimonv should he this morning or iutirnated or
You wanted with me other than what gathered
from letter OF the conversation that occurred between
Won ana in regard 10 Mr.. Wood You wanted me, #
had delcacy feeling in the matter, 10 come down
here, which deemng it your duty TO ca'i me Of course
had O. DOyOu remember one occasion IN the sum
season think about year ago now. that you were
other, that came INTO Court about or o'clock III the
afternoon; that you sent messenger To me 10 90 around
also therc YOU sent the same message 10 lim
we met in tie pack rOOm-dO you remember that Occa
slonf a. Not that particular occasions SaN, you
any body else IN my Courtroom when had about
down until got through but have no recollection Of
such occurrence as that. O. DO y0u remember OF SIT
myself about the story OF the japanese swnde fully and
in deta-I mean that connected with the Metropolitan
Q. DO you recOllcct any conversation between yourself
Mr. Anderson aud myself IN that small room IN VIM, IN.
circumstance Of this lease was talked over! A. do not
rccOect il because 10 never occurred o. You are able 10
swear that A. Certainly or at any olhGr tline OF
acc m 10 90 t bote ISr iniersfod do Won recodrt that
Won proceeded to give a detail OF this Wood matter
minutely, from beginning TO eL6i 40 you Ien,In
nothing OF that kind ever occurred, because knew
an about the lease knew there never any Intention
to prevent Nj Wood getting the amount Of his money
he was entitled to 1t. but at that tmc he very
troublesome 10 TamUauy Hail. ana 10 became necessary
TO give him a bad character and we did So o. IL is not
interfering with us at that time IN iamnany Han. e.
But it is not now The Court do not
thew T. Brennan, on behalf or the CITY, testified az
CITY during the year 1861 A Yes. Sir q. We're you
applied any manner III reference To the resolution o!
premises in Guestoni A. Yes sir @, Who applied
youG \. l received in the first place communication
y0ui A. Yes. sr-lwitness produced IT, Mr. Williams
proposed to READ IL IN evidence ana M ohea s ne .u
10 objection. Mr. Williams read the letters as follows
No. IS last FogRTEEsFH.sr, pee l5 1865.
hury Of baaes yesterday MAYORS OEcs mpoaped
sign several esotoHs among which was one renewing Tue lease Of
have since seen he pint: aud examination convinced
II tie hs oes may ~ You to return
VS1S trvly your C. GoDYEKr GUSrHEE.
% DID YOU sign any lease Of these prcniscsf A. did
not at that time I signed the former lease which had
ds vas that letter cannot answer whether the Cor
n0atio Counsel had occupied the designated for
him in that building during the continuance o. the lease
which preceded this resolution the corporation COM,
se called on me TO look at the building; accompanied
him, and met Mr.. Wood there, and We went through
the building. O. What Corporation Counsel DO you refer
tor A. Mr. John l.. Devlm; thought you spoke OF tue
former leases. @ did. You did examine the premises
with hml A. did; do not know whether ne occupied
them all he said he intended TO- Inc Judge tald inc
answer was not responsive lie th9ngnt me PIece9hg
question imnateral IN the case ana N2uu srIhe to
answer. do not know whether MI. Devhh ever occu.
med the Wood building Corporation Counsel; do not
know, but think that Mt OG0rnau ms successor never
occupied that building as Corporation counsel: NJ.
seaThat not responsive me JuG5e o[dGaGI IT, 90
struck out. O. Did you receive any letter rom MT noou
absut that time1 A. After my positive reI9sM 10
sign Mr. Wood sent letter. when rcad was ts Iaf c na
forth Mr.. Woods willingness to remove All objections 10
administrator and Corporation Attorney in complete
order O. Did you receive at that time from MI OGOr-
man any objection TO your signing the ledseI A. Yes,
sir; think Mr. OGOnnan called on me. @ State whether
he assented or dissented. Mr.. shea-Oh, no We VIII
Court-Whether ne assented not is conclusion OF
fact to gathered from what you say They object TO
his oninion Mr. OGOrmanI suppose the fact that the
premises not occupied by me Is the TACT 10 be got
at The Court-That is fact which can he very SIMPLY
proved @. Did you have any conversations win Mr.;
Wood referencetO signing lease OF those premises
A. No Sir Q. How long after A Immediately after
within day or two after the passage OF inc resolution
10 conversation with Mr.. Wood about the re-ettng Of
InoSg Mr. Wood had stated to me previously that
he would let IL 10 the city agan 1t had no refer
enoe the resolution or anything OF the KIND But
YOU recOlect than that bare facti A. NO, SIR
don't recOect anything more than that fact. cross
YOU visited and examined the premises with Mr. Devn
Corporation COUNSEL A, Yes, Sir 1t was some time IN
1s9 n WAS few DAYS previous the lease being signed
for it. O. few days previous TO the FIRST leasei A.
Yes SIR. @ What was the purpose OF TINS examination
A Mr. Deyln called upon me ana stated
that he desired-lobected tOl Q. You may
state the purpose whether II was 10 ascer-
tain whether they were suitable for tho Corpora
tion COunses object A. What is iii TO show they were
suitable for him think we made careful exam
ination of premises. O. And the conclusion you ar
rived WHAT Mr. Emott objected The Court
would not allow the conclusion at which Mt Devln ar
rived as that could be proved by himself O. What
Yonr coneluslon from the examnatl0ni DIT Em0tt OBJ