New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-05-04


SAGE, DIR. ECHEvERRIA, MRS. MARY u
GILBERT, AND MISS LILLE GILBERT.
The twentieth day Of the trial OF Daniel 1.
Mcfarland for the murder OF Albert d. Richardson was
not marked by any apparent abatement In the interest,"
that has been manifested from the commencement MOI
by any dminuton in the numbers in attendance. The
ladies present in large numbers and the portion Of
the room assigned 10 them filed to overlooking,
many being obi ged to stand
The Court was opened Recorder Harkett on the
Bench and the counsel both sides In their place. ana
the taking OF testimony shortly aerward resumed
The first witaess was David Atwood, who was examined
by Judge Davis.
TEsTIMoNr OF DAVID ATWOOD.
reside In Madison Wisconsin, and have lived there
twenty years represent the MADISON District in Con
gress; knew the prisoner there during the fore part Oh
the wlr-abOut '62.
O. Now do you recollcct Mrs. Netherlands giving pub
lie readings therei A. do; attended one
O. For what purpose was it gveni objected TO and
excluded.l
O. Was it a SUGGEST lOblcctod to.I
Judge DavsI mean a. TO the success OF the reading
Question excluded.
O. You we're the editor of a daily paper therci A. I
No cross-examnation.
TESTIMONY JOEL b. ELwooD.
M Joel Il. Ewood, who called and examined ~
the defense was then called and examined by Judge Da
Wis.
A copy OF the original complaint made by Daniel
Mcfarland against Richardson TO March 49, lsCe,
was produced and identified by the witness.
@. Who appeared on the other side A. Mr.. Bangs
appeared nomnaly, think.
Q. Is that the original answer A. The contents arc
very much like the copy.
Mr.. GIaham-we object to the answer being put In
evidence lExcluded.l
Judge Garyinwe will put either the complaint or
the answer in.
Cross-examned by Mr. Graham-This intercepted let
n has hean alle from
Of the 9th OF March 1867 letter from Mrs. Sinclair OF
Feb d. 1897 the letters In evidence on tho
mart Of the defense when did they first come into your
A About the time Of the commencement OF
the action which in the Fall o>6 about the time
I was first consulted by him.
O. How long did they remain in your possessioni A.
They remained there until December, 1869.
O. That so, is It'll A. Yes, Sir; think copy OF tho
intercepted letter TAKEN but the original was with
To Judge CARVING. You say there was copy Of the
intercepted letter which he took with hinf A. Yes SIR
@. You don't know but that there copies Of tho
other ettersi A do not Sir but they might nave been
taken before they were delivered to me.
Mr.. Graham-Mr. Pomeroy described them as dozen
Judge GaryinHe did not say anything about original
To Mr.. Graham--I know Of no summons in being in
that suit prior To Dec. 20, 1861
TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL SINCLAIR.
Judge Davis then recalled Mr. Samuel Sinclair but Mr.
Graham objected TO his testimony being TAKEN unless
the prosecution assigned for it, Recorder
Hackett ruled that the objection was well taken and
Judge Davis stated that they wished to prove that the
money received for the reading in steinway Hall was
p' O. Do you recoiiect reading given by Mrs. Nc
Fafla9d at stenway Hail. A. Yes Sir in small ALL r0om
hands A. portion of them did; should say In tho
o. BY whom was it collected from youf A. My reeo
lection is that Mr.. Mcfarland came down to my office
for them the morning; there then some adyer-
Using bills unpaid, and lie down during the day,
and the money was paid to nun: y nj, u,,, ,oLo.
receipt A. No, Sir: ,.
O. Mrs Mcfarland came first herself, and then, when
her husband happened to come In you gave the money
@ e'i Did he ask tori 'it A. He asked for IL.
some alkI do not remember what; am not positive
that Sow ,sAs for ~oa me ss sSS to tell me wn.
that Is list Of the Stockholders Of THE TnlBrsEi pa
O. When was that correct listl A: Never. w.
q DIR. Aver is stakeholder in The TRIBusEi A. fes.
q. To what extenti A; think IA shares. oo
q. Valued at how muchi A. The par value was n,"N
O. Is not the actual value sloOooi A. 1t has been
sold as high that
b Wt eg y hye seep sod foT "
o. You and Mr.. Greeley and Oliver johnson also own
share.
TESTIMONY OF MRS. vANDRSHOFF.
Judge Davis then called and examined Mrs Mary Van
denho wife of George vandenhoI reside in this city;
my husband is at present in Chicago; have met MFR.
Nc Farlaud two or three times; resided in this city
Ieo3 and previous to that time.
O. You know the fact OF Mrs Mcfarland taking lesso
Of yonr husband as a teacheri A. do, sr
q. Your husband has been an actorf A. lie has that
formerly his profession; he Is acting at present. he
has also been engaged as a teacher OF elocuton.
hint A. In 1862 and SO; between those years think
she took ~ lessons, at the rate Of two week; saw Mr.
Mcfarland there when the lessons cOmmenced he came
there with her. cannot give the conversation that oc-
Cured between him and my husband
Q. After taking lessons OF your husband, what change
was made the method A. She then took lessons OF
for two three terms she took lessons OF me be-
my terms were more reasonable than those Of my
Q. Do You recOlect whether she gave public reading
about that timei A. She gave parlor reading for
clair; Mr.. Mcfarland with carriage, and Mrs.
NJ Farand accompanied me 10 the reading; remained
with them until the reading and then they took
O. viii you recolect what they said in regard TO their
object in taking you theret A; do not remember MI
Mcfarland and sat together during the evening, but
do not remember the conversation
Cross-examned by Mr.. Graham-Q VIII you he kind
term vast A. If recollect, his terms then were
$50 for II lessons; they are not the same now.
were A. Twenty five dollars think the house they
took me TO where the reading was given was up town.
this must have been IN the spring OF 1853
TESTIMONY MRS. ABIGAIL SAGE.
Mrs. Sage, the mother Of Mrs. Mcfarland, was then
called and examined by Judge Davis
reside in CharlestOwn, Mass and am the mother Of
Mrs. Richardson formerly Mrs. Mcfarland.
Mr.. Graham-we object to that form of question They
cannot assume marriage when the former has not
been nullited.
The witness-I have resided in Charlestown five years
next October; previous that resided In Manchester
n. H. resided at the latter place at the time VI my
daughters marriage, the lih day Of December, 1885,
most Of her life she lived with except she went 10
school In New Haven and also In ewBrain that was
all the time she away from me except IN the Sum
OF 1857, when she was In Boston. .
q. viii you state what school advantages she hadf
A. She the best Of the schools in New Hampshire
o. viii YOU state her attainmentst A. l know that