New-York tribune., 1868-05-01

to whether the witness believed on the evening OF the
OF March that there any certificates there TO be
gwen him in exchange for his bonds were objected 70
between McSsrs Field and Clark as TO tho adnssDity
OF this class of evidence and the right OF counsel to In
dulge IN personal abuse and vituperati0n.
Mr.. Thomas G.. Shearman was recalled. Had seen me
pa!{DI D in Tue Ine hao"a % t i NOT know Who made The
opnrotou before Judge Gilbert did not know who was
The plaintiff IN that pT9cseug nau seen paper IN,
ago. did know what had become OF IL; knew nothing
OF Mr. Asheys affidavit; there was no entry whatever IN
the register OF the wness once OF te presentation to
Judge Gilbert had got his knowledge from hearing let
Mr. Clark tnen asked the witness the contents Of that
letter and then withdrew the question Mr. Field pressed
advantage OF nCautOus question by their opponents
Mr. Ashley resumed the bonds were for s5O00OO each,
1903 the stamps marked being cancelled March
s. 1858 the five cent certificate stamps were cancelled
February l9 1865 The witness then produced the agree
ment which bad been made on the evening of the th OF
March, 1t had been given to witness. signed by Mr..
fore given ii by Mr. Groesbcck in his esmony wit
ness did not know who had inserted his name In the
had been inserted when he first saw it. he
had afierward, in the presence OF Mr. Drew,
Where blanks were left; the agreement was never
stamped he had paid the note had left the bonds
with Mr. Groesbeck security for his note had not seen
the bonds until the time of that examination the
note authorized Mr. Drew TO sell the bonds when he CON
sdered for the interest OF the witness Mr. Drew had not
given the witness any account OF the transaction did
not know where the affidavit he had made on the evening
making the affidavit
During the progress of the crossexaminaton Of this
witness. extraordinary number OF objections were
made by Mr. Clark and great amount OF heated discus
sion took place between that gentleman and Mr. Field
was employed in the office OF Dudley Feld had seen
Mr. Drew, Mr. Belden and Mr. Groesbeck there one night
in March, took adayIts that night, did not Know
whose or how many; Mr. Dudley Field asked him TO come
there did not remember whether he copied any papers
the agreement shown his writing; he wrote IL AT Mr.
Fields house on the evening referred to- did not know
by who the nterpolated words Oshen d. Ashley were
bo them
pell had no positive recollection OF having sworn Mr
Ashley that night identified jurat shown him as hav-
ing been taken before him the 9th OF March at Judge
P0rter's had previously taken Mr. Bcdens oath TO
effect in MrShearmans Office the 9TH OF March
had administered a similar oath TO Mr. Henry II. Smith,
In Mr. Shearmans office thought Mr. Beden was pres
davs on the evening Of the 9TH Of March, at Mr. Fields
ness and other clerks in the office Of Mr. Field and Mr.
Shearinan the papers in the application for mandamus
same time did NOT recoect having seen that affidavit
at Mr. Fields house on the evening referred To !;
remembered administering an oath TO MI Ashley J
| agreement bore date March
Crosse Examined by Mr. Field-saw Mr. Beden and Mr..
Porter at MIR Portes ROOM looking over tho complaint
and application for injunction Mr.. Field then read part
of the application, setting forth that for necessary i'm
provements on the road il necessary stock
and that the injunction that had been issued re-
strained the Company from issuing such stock,
and artfully drawn 10 cripple the Company.
The reading OF that part Of the application vehe
menty opposed by the counsel for the prosecution Mr.
Field said that the fact OF those statements beng con-
tanned in the application to Judge Gilbert, cOncluslyey
showed that he had been in possession Of these facts
when he granted his Injunction and thus the very nice
bubble which had Ostentatiously inflated about
that injunction having been obtained by trick and device
was at once dissolved. Mr. Clark replied that Justice
Gilbert had testified that those facts not stated TO
him. and appealed 20 the stenographic notes TO corrobo
rate his Mr. Field retorted that Justice Gil
bert had known OF these statements and that Mr CLARK
knew that he fnew II.
Redirect examination by Judge Da viesEe had taken
Mr.. Smiths affidavit the 7th Of March Mr.. shear
mans office Mr. Dudley Field paid the wages OF the
clerks who drew these napers; Mr. Beden was engaged
reading that complaint at Mr. POrters when the
witness went in.
Mr. Henry n. Smith OF the firm OF Smith, GOdd, Martin
Co.. was recalled and testified: He supposed his firm
stockholder in Erie early part Of March DID not
Erie convertible bonds received some Enc stock from
Mr. Fisk March O. 25,O0O shares in book identified his
receipt TO Fisk Belden Co for that stock he delivered
that stock TO the office Of VIM Heath Co Mt 70 they
received checks from Heath for IT, anu gave them Mr.
Fisk the transactions not entered on their books
they received oneeghth Of p9r cent for that trans
action had paid the money on the l0h OF March;
identified his signature "a bond the Injunction by
Judge Gilbert did not remember who requested him 10
Agn the bond make the aiidavitS did remember
whether he knew the truth OF the rectals In hs affidavit
Mr. Belden was recalled.-Dd not distinctly recOllect
the circumstances at Mr.. Fields house the evening
of the th Of March could not whether he there
than identified his signature tho
complaint before Judge Glbert he had read the paper
when he made oath TO 1t think he IL in Mr. POr
ters room the Metropolitan did not remember who
lie employed his counsel In his suit, there were so
many suits going what he did was done under the
| advice OF counsel did not know who employed the
Brooklyn lawyers Mr.. Sbearman had his authority to
| 20 on with the suit.
The examination OF the witness then discontinued
the Court announced its decision, that the bail OF
Mr. jay Gould should be reduced 10 the of $1,000
after which the Court adjourned until II o'clock this
morning