New-York tribune., 1870-04-13


THE LETTERS
The seventh day of the Mcfarland trial at
tracted an immense crowd although fewer suceededln
gaining admission than on the previous day, emehht
arrangements having been made TO exciude All VINO han
10 special business there Enough were present. bow
ever TO fill all the seats. Several ladies we're among INC
number Mr. Mcfarland arrived at an carly hour, ana
was soon afterward Joined by his little boy Percy, who
has been present every day since the OK
the trial.
The Court was opened at O'Clock, Recorder Hacke
on the bench and after delay OF few moments the
examination Of witnesses for the defense resumed
TESTIMONY OF n. s. j. GREEN.
Mr. Nicholas St. John Green was the first witness
called He was examined by Mr. Gerry, and testified as
follows:
am an attorney -ataw, and reside In Boston; have
been a member OF the Boston bar le years
O. DO you remember having been retained In the year
1867, in Boston, in a certain proceeding on habeas
corpus brought by Daniel Mcfarland against Mrs Nc
Farland, or against Mr.. and Mrs. sagef A. Ido
O. BY whom were you retainedi A. Mr.. PhiDips,a
member OF the bar met In the street. and wanted 10
know II would go into Court with him, as he had
case which was in awkward predicament; vent INTO
Court and there found the prisoner at the ba. there
was motion commit the father and mother i1r con
tempt in not producing the child in Court.
@. Who the counsel for Mr. Mcfarland A. MT
Sanford and Mr.. Loring
O. Did you at or about that time have any interview
when was first employed in the case I cannot ray
how long it was after that first him; think ho
came into my office some time afterward
O. Now state what done in the case Instituted by
hint
BY the Court-That is ruled out
Mr. Gerry-I offer TO show that at the time he re-
taned as counsel in this proceeding that Mr. Richardson
called upon him and said that he would pay all the ex-
penses in the case that he advised retaining Gov An
drews to assist in the conduct OF the case He deemed
1t important that political influence should be had, and
that Gov Andrews who connected at THE TRIBUNE
Office was the best man to retain further offer TO
show that Mr. Richardson gave the witness retaining
fee in his draft tExcluded]
O. DO you remember 10 have Mr. Richardson sub
sequent to tbatf A. did on several occasions
O. Did you receive from him any Instructions with re-
gard 10 the conduct OF the casei
Objected 10
Mr. Graham-NOw If your Honor please II seems 70 mo
that there is enough this 10 show that Richard
son was engaged in fighting Mr. Mcfarland. In the first
place we have this intercepted letter He distinctly
states that be does 10 allow the grass TO grow
under his feet until he succeeds in marrying Mrs Me
Farland. Now wish 10 prove that ne stated 10 TINS
witness that this would never again I'VE with her
husband Now il to have been one or the puIdes
of Mr. McFarlands complaints, not that he was hghtng
his wife, but he lighting temptations that Rich
ardson had thrown about ms wie. ms "e "a WIN. WIN
the means OF supporting herself she was without
inss ins ngsH' aad unless she could keep tie children,
they were potent reasons why she should
able TO keep one or both of these children her
possession she would have gone back to her husband
first because she had with which TO support
herself apart from tlem and secondly sooner tnah So
rhce her natural affection Ior her Sh,reH sne % w1
view to put her in that position where she could main
tain her children as against Der husband. Richardson
gives her benefit OF his money lii resi- ting the effort
OF this father to reclaim his children Is 1t not he ease
that Richardson took this woman away from the hue,
band In order to make alienation from her husband
perfectly certain he takes care TO take one OF ne chdh
in advance of her leaving and II the father had oee ae
get his children this matter would have been toppd
ny @ R ID SIST the S opposition from
Richardson, and not from the mother because she Vas
without TO the warfare and To DEFY her NUS
not failed the significant passage in this let
The rc1nssaH right anaoteabie and viii 10, stag
week Ibsve not been waiting you darling ali these long
e hSh & and ,sTs s,S. sV1 e 70 re S ou & % @
seek pillow without wanting to Sed ySa in ny arms Tor
Be- long enough best No grass shall aner et
What does this mean by allowing no grass to grow
under his feetl Why he means to maintain her In pos
session of her children, and az the same time proceed
prisoner at the bar. submit that have not the right
to snow that while NJ Farand was going around aud
complaining Richardson being the OF his trouble
did he not make the right accusation against him
II your Honor please very important part OF ths De
fense is show what kind Of deusons ms man = Is
under at the time One of them was that she loved 1n
STILL Was not that calculated to frenzy ths man beyond
mind entitled to establish the facts OF II from the
bat mans minG Are we not entitled to SHOW hat he
reasoned himself that Richardson was the man that
was Justified in thus reasoningl The idea Of separation
from her children would make her virtuous. Have
Ddas not e sA' 90 Oe draw is back the to
her husbands VINO had the right TO stand
in between him and them at that or any other time IL
the prosecution say that ON the ground Of i'm
morality he had forfeited his right TO his children We
separation of this mother from these children had caused
her to return Immediately to the children Mhy have We
this man Richardson this was not accomplished WY
should not we allowed 10 show who it was ta' ear
ried out this wicked programme IL SHE had had no
control the purse OF this man Richardson she eod
oT to RETAIN ser in his possession minnie rc
theless TO concede 70 her some human hai sac Vas
vibrating between her affection for her husband ad the
desire to keep disgrace away from them. .
Ii to me that after what mas appe,iteu IN us
case we entitled to show that he redeemed the pcg,
that made in this letter. He allowed no grass Ia grow
under his feet. He prolonged the period OF ts mans
grief beyond all necessity aud al precedent. We pro
pose show state OF facts that but for me Interference
this Richardson aiter that %oman mad lcit her
husband and taken her children she might neNethers -
have induced 10 return; and with the view Ia pre-
vent the separation OF the children from ae, o gshns
result he went to work and employed counsel at
his own expense TO fight oil the father.
BY the COurtWe must not lose sight 0t this con sdera
tion whether the prisoner is guilty OF murder IN the
first gree and that Richardson Is not On tria III Is
competent for the defense to show by conNrSt0ns of
this character il il repeated 10 Mcfarland, whether
the statements of that conversation were true or not
The statements made by MI Richardson that ne nteha.d
10 have this woman were immediately connected To MI.
Mcfarland. Tint certainly was Important Vow, u
you show that the statements made were cohlnnLl
Gated Mr.. Me Farand, IL is competent testimony ana
could be admitted; but unless you can >hoa tnat " was
communicated to Mcfarland, II is certainly h't eompe
Mr.. Grahan--we cannot show it by this wines
BY Mr. Gerry-Q How long was thai ha',,as 'or'ns
proceeding pending A. From some time ~ APfti 10
O. Now. from the time of the commencement up tho
time the termination Of these preeedins 'ild yon
aye interviews or % sS%s Ne N nSGSS s
timesour six times, believe; never spoke ." hin
o. viii you describe his appearance you thcn'ob-
served him A. There were reasons why dd not par
IA very