The New York herald., 1870-11-24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT couaT--lN EQUITY.
The Jay Cocko Alleged CoautorToit Seven
Thirty CsntrOvcrsy-A Wisness in Con-
tcnipt.


Thirty Csntrovcrsy-A Wisness in Con.
tcnipt.
Before Judge Blatcnford
The United States u.s. jay cooke a Cb-Yestcr-
day was the seventh day In which the Court has
been occupied In the trial Of this cause Much
OF the time OF the first few days was taken
up by counsel for the defence interposlng points
OF law technically raised against the jurisdlc.
ton OF the Court ana also In combating
the status OF the government In claiming redemp-
tion for the eighteen 200 thirty notes pur-
chased from the Defendants and which, IL is alleged
are counterfeit, and for the recovery OF the value
thereof the action Is brought District Attorney
DAVIS successfully sustained the right Of the gov
ernm mt to prosecute the case for recovery ana
then the main question for the Court aud jury was
whether the eighteen seven-thrty notes In the
hands Of the government were the Identical notes
bought IN by the ub-Trcasurer from jay Cooke A.
Co., and whether they were counterfelts. Upon
tins point testimony, spreading over some four or
Ave days, has been taken. The process OF examIna-
ton was more than ordinarily tedious and slow In
consequence OF the frequent reference necessary to
the books OF Jay Cooke aud the comparison OF dates
figures and series ~ between the entries In the
several books and the notes themselves.
firm o. jay Cooke i ca. auessisn arose as
to whether the witness was not guilty Of con-
tempt. Mr.. Fahnestock, IN response TO the order
OF the Court issued on the previous day, produced
a letter book ana two other Office books Of Jay
Cooke u 90. From an examination OF these IL ap.
peared that eighteen Treasury seyen-thirty notes. OF
the date number and series corresponding with
those alleged 10 be counterfeit, were purchased by
the defendants from different parties In open mar
ket and that subsequent to the alleged discovery OF
their spurious CHARACTER OF which they were duly
informed by the Sub treasurer, they notified the
various parties that the notes 80 purchased from
them had hecn declared counterfeit; and that dc.
lendants wonld hold these parties responsible for
any loss or damage that might accrue from the pur
chase OF tho notes In question.
NOTION TO COMMIT THE WITNESS FOR CONTEMPT
At the close Of Mr.. Fahnestock's testimony Dis
trct Attorney Davis charged tnat the witness had
not, the production OF the books IN the first In
stance conorlnel TO The order OF the Court, ~ he
should have done, and that lie was aware OF mis-
noncompliance with the order at the time, and
that he, therefore, had acted knowingly In the mat
ter and with intent TO deceive the Court, and was
consequently IN contempt. He therefore, asked the
Court TO punish the witness for the contempt OF
which he was guilty In The premises.
Judge Baichford, In reply stated that he would
fendonts on the motion 70 commit lor contempt on
Saturday next.
Tie examination Of witnesses was then re-
aumed.
Oh comparison OF the notes in court, alleged to
be counterfeit and TO be those received from Jay
Cooke & Co., with the entries in defendants books,
eighteen entries were found corresponding In date,
namc number and series with tho alleged counter
fclts.
The Court stated that IN order for the government
OF pGper-the alleged counterfeit Dotes-were never
issued by the government 1t has undertaken to
prove this, but unless proves also that these papers
came rom the defendants 1t cannot affect the do
PENDANTS IijIirlousy.
Mr.. CASTELAR,, an engfaver from the Trogsury De-
partmcnt, was pat On The stand as an expert and at
the close OF hs testimony the court adjourned Til
tomorrow at eleven O'Clock.