Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1868-12-05
The Point of Rocks (sie,repoIi,au) Rail-

pany, " herein the forrmsn ana employees OF
said company We're arrested while ntgsing
trenches ON Ist street east between aud h,
appeared before Justice Walter for eSsmina-
uJn yesteI day afternoon IN the Criminal Court
room. The cOuus sci on both sides, as previously
enumerated, and parties IN custody, together
with a de T. CD ment of the police force, were
promptly ON hand at half past % res O'Clock,
when the point under discussion 1t the close
of the last meeting, 10 wit, the legality Of Mayor
Bowen evidence as to the bou udlrIes OF the
city, was resumed. Mr.. Cook opened the dis
cussiOn the part of the prosecution, main.
tamil, z that hearsay testimony Is admissible la
reIauCn TO the question OF boundary, according
10 IN. best legal authority, which he elaboritaly
quoted from.
HIS argumsi was replied to by Judge Leach
and Mr.. Norris, counsel Tor the defence, who
cout.L ded thai, when original evidence was 40
existence IL was improper 10 depend upon
hearsay testimony to prove = case.
Jusuce Waiter, at the conclusion OF the dis
Cussion, ruled that the proper authority as
to the boundaries OF the city was accessible To
the Court, II was out OF place 10 rely upon oral
testimony to explain the same
MIR. Cook asked the Justice to put his ruling
IN writing, which was objected 10 By Mr.. MIL
IrT; who hoped that the time Of the Cont
would not b. thus cons umPd.
MI Cook urged his request, aud stated tnat
he could produce autno1ty IN substantis
VI every position for the counsel the PrJsecu-
ton had taken.
MT. MIller-ssI challenge the gentleman 10
prUdu any such authority"
Mr.. Cook II despise alike the gentlemau's
challenge and the gentleman himself"
Mr.. hIillrr.-..I despIse the gentieman's po-
siton and his character, too"
Justice Walter.-"I have made the ruling.
Go on ~ ltu tue case. y
Mr.. Cook then called Mayor Bowen to the
witnesses stand, aud asked the question:. s'If
there was such street within the city as First
strsetl'
To this question the counsel for the defence
objected, Is II had already beea decided tuat
nearsay testimony was not sufficient to prove
this matter. A protrscted discussion followed,
winch finally resulted III the Abandonment OF
Mayor Bowen AS witness; whereupon Mr..
Mr. COOK, and the question put. "Was he the
Surveyor OF the city OF Washington The
counsel for the defence objected 10 this ques-
non. and upon this ObIec ION another prOtrdcted
discussion ensued, in which II was contended
by the defence that proof should be adduced
who was the surveyor, and by what authority
lie was acting s such. MIR. Bliss 10 ust produce
the record OF Ills official position before he
could be acknowledged as the City Surveyor
Mr. Cook replied taat II WAS we'll kno Rn to
the Justice that Mr.. Bliss was Surveyor, and
by what mode he had been made such
Counsel for defence then yielded their point.
and were willing TO admit that Mr.. Bliss was
Surveyor, but denied that he was the custodian
OF the records W hlch Were produced IN court.
and which he claimed TO have control of.
Mr.. Cook offered to produce authority to
prove that he was the custodian OF The records;
when the counsel for the defence appealed TO
the Court for It's decision.
ustIee Waller decided that IL was proper
for MIR. Bliss 10 be subjected 10 Su,h a course
OF examination as Mr.. Cook proposed. when
that gentleman, (Mr. Bliss,) as Surveyor of
Washington, st1ted that about two WEEKS since
be visited the section of the city where 1t was
proposed to dig for the track OF the M.tropOll-
TIN raIlroa., aud then defined what was the
grade of the street. Mr.. Cook asked Mr. Bliss
whether there were any excavations ON First
and streets, when the couI sci for the defence
entered protest against any such mode of ex-
animation. They (the deieuc conteu ded that
Mr.. Murray was the party arraIgned and il
must be proven that he had dug certain bitches
within the streets of the Corporation. That
there We're guilies and bitches on 1 street tn.y
feeiv admitted. but that WAS no evidence
against the defence.
MIR. Cook replied that if the counsel for the
defence would be patient ne would show that
these lenChss Were dug by MIR. Murray Pnis
statement was not satisfactory 10 counsel OF de-
f-nce- " HIN another long argument occurred.
which finally eliminated in the withdrawal of
MT Bliss from the witness stan 4. and the in
PRODUCTION of Mr. Crane, CJmniss Toner OF n
pToNemen's for the Fourth Ward. THIS wit
ness (CTinel was proceeding TO say that on the
10Th DAY OF November he found a numb-r of
men digging up street, aud went 10 Mr.. Muir
ray, as foreman, WHO stated that ne hal given
orcers 10 eNC4yate the street
lie egupsel Tor defence OBJECTED again, and
both sides had good deal 10 say in favor OF
AID in opposition 10 Mr.. Cranes proceeding;
after which The Justice decided in favor o. his
going on, when, in answer TO questions from
Mr. Cook he tCrane) stated that upon going to
Mr.. Murray about the trep ch-s, ha MURRAY
said that ne did not know that he was violating
the law. Witness then described tue C character
OF the Trenches, OF which there Were two-oue
or each side, tn elect of which was TO proven:
Az passage
Cross examined nv Mr. NJ ller:-"Wbat was
yonr exact question and Mr.. Mu.ray's reply! ?"
Mr.. Crane-'.I said, Mr. Murray, am sur
pIIsed TO find you digging mp tue streets IN
violation Of the city laws He said that ne did
not know that il was Illegal, and l told him
he must CO no more work there. Murray satd
he would DO no mere work there unless by per-
mission Of The Mayor, and that he would have
some dirt carried back TO I'LL up the trenehas.''
Counsel Tor tue prosecution obIects II other
questions, and contended that AR. Crane
should not be questioned beyond the point
y here they. the prosecution, had dropped MIN.
The counsel for the defence contended that
" hat Mr.. Murray stated TO Mr.. Crane was le-
gItim ate evidence. which position was protest.
cd aninst by counsel ON the other side bnt
finally an appeal was made - the Justice,
" he decided that Mr.. Crane could make his
statement and IL might be taken for " hat IL was
worth, but il could not exactly b. valid evil
dence.
Witness Crane then proceeded to state that
..Mr. MurTay.afler stating that he did not know
Baltimore and sse Mr.. Randolph, representa-
1--WE Oi the Baltimore and Ohio railroad, and
learn " hat course was TO be pursued
M Miiier.-"Mr; Crane, oid Mr.. Murray
say he was having The trenches dugl"
Mr.. CTane.-..be said, Il will dig no more
without written permission from the Mayor
from which the inference was drawn that he
Uas digging the trenches. He b id nothing but
a COOK in his hand" Witness thought the
work OF digging was begun The day before the
25th OF November. he Murray SAID he was
experimenting the men.
In the course of the argument which oc.
Cured during the examination OF this witness
Mr.. IOtten, counsel for the defence. utia
some remark about s.ufing the witness
tCIaue,) when
Mr. Cook said, .sIf the gentleman means 10
iusII uate .hat L have attempted 10 stuff the
witness. be states a falsehood.'
Judge Leach.-"Do you mean your remarks
for me-
Mr. Cook-"l mean it for either or you three
who have insInUated 10 the effect that / have
altsmpt,d to stuff the witness
Judge Leach lyon should name the coun-
sci 10 whom you allude ! IL YOU mean me,
you assert what you know 10 ne untrue
Lieu Eckioff, OF The police vas theq put on
the witness stand, and stated the fact of the
arrest of the men, and their escort undef guard
u the -Four b Ward station-house, precs ued by
Mr.. Murray, who said that he was the super
ing-nCent, and had charge of the men At York.
Mr. DOEegan next took the stand. and stated
That The street on which the men arrested were
al work was in the city, and used IS public
ihOrOughfare. Or the evening OF the 18th Wit
ness Int out to where the men were al work
and asked Mr. Murray if he had any authority
10 dig the trenches, when he replied that ne
had not. He said mat he was having the work
done, and would progress no further till he OBJ
tanned permission from The Mayor.