The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1871-06-20
TEE LATIAHAW TRIAL.
THIRD DAYS PROCEEDINGS.
Cr Lanehan and His Counsel a, Witnasges-Tes-
timony All the Way from tho Flcod-The
Books Now Sought For Through the
Courts Never Asked For by Or. Lana
han Amy Other Way-Eo Ex-
otse for His Landamus

proceeded with the fEye5lgatl0n. Judge Reynolds
made statement TO the committee in relation to
their order OF Saturday for the examination OF
books. The defence had applied to DR.. Carton for
the books to De taken into the private ofce adjoln
ing the agents. office. where Dr.. Cartons private
accountant Is now examining the same. Dr. Carl
ton positively refused, he construed the order Of
tho committee TO prohibit this under the supervision
Of Mr.. Grant Judge Reynolds also cal.el attention
to the letter from Mr. Goo1enough to the committee
on Saturday which, being about 10 be read, was
prohibited by Mr.. Rooh, Of counsel for the prosecu
ton. MI. Rolph and other counsel, together with
the chairman, explained that tho Letter was with
drawn Temporarily so that another OF similar ilu-
port, but drawn with greater care might be offered;
and this letter Is now IL TIE cnatrmans hands, ana
can be read II the committee desire it, Members on
jected to the reading at this time, and IT was with
held.
Mr.. Fancher remarked that he was glad to see by
the papers thar the committee had adopted its Gin
cinnati resolution IN regard to the examination OF
the books, and that DR.. Carton had courage
enough TO stand by it. That Is the room into which
tho books had been taken before and from which
the
vIIEsr SANDERS AGAINST THE CONCERN,
the Treasurer OF the Missionary Society and others
have been given TO the world through the public
press. And It Is time that this private room busl
Lanahan and his friends.
Mr.. T. II. Golge, tho accountant, who had been
employed hy Dr. Lanahan in his preparation for his
former trial before the Book Committee, in January
last, was the first witness called. He testified
that he commenced the examination OF books
November g. 1870 ana made his report in
writing 10 DR.. Lanahan January IS or 10, 1911;
he was examining the books during few days or
the trial, and While 1t was pending he made a fur
ther application for fresh boohs-chcck books,
vouchers and cash b0oks-ald was informed by Mr..
Grant that he knew nothing about those books &c;
that they were in the keeping OF Mr.. Dcnh,m, the
cashier; Mr.. Denham refused, without Dr. Carl.
toms PERMISSION and as he was not present, nothing
could be done until next day, when fresh appica-
ton was made both by Afr. Gouge and Judge Rey-
nods which was positively denied by Dr.. Carlton
on the ground that DR.. Lanahan had had sufficient
opportunity tor ten weeks to examine those books,
&c. In his crosse examination Mr.. Gouge stated that
his report might have dated January .; that it
was printed and was signed by himself and Mr..
Charles a. Apel revenue clerk, then in Brooklyn.
Mr.. Fanchcr sought to show by the
examination that the application OF witness
for the books was male after The witness
had rendered his report to DR.. Lanahan;
but Gougc was perfectly Obvious or dates and i'm
presslons.
Some unmportant discussion took place on the
standing Of Mr.. Apcll, after Which Judge Rey
holds took the stand ana corroborated Mr. Gouges
report OF refusal OF books ana his own subsequent
refusal Of the same by Dr.. Carlton: the application
was not further pressed, because he Reynolds) mad
had an understanding with Mr. Fancher that, II DR..
Lanahan would withdraw his answer to the charge
In the January trial and sign certain papers, the
Coodenough suit would be withdrawn. This state
menJ was positively denied by Mr.. Fancher, who
said he had no control whatever over the Good
enough suit and could not have made any sucn
promise But what he did say to Judge Reynolds
ana the subcommittee which arranged the guasnng
Of the former trial was that he would use his III
fuencc win Mr.. Goodenough to have that suit
stopped, because he did not believe in
SUING METHODIST PREACHERS
ana had strongly advised against the bringing of
this case. There was an apparent discrepancy be-
tween the statements Of both counsel OF which boh
were pretty positive in asserting.
@ Did not say to you that II DR.. Lanahan would
make proper retraction had no doubt the Good
enough suit would be discontinued, and did not you
subsequently report that you could not get Dr. Lana
han TO do anytninga A. am positive l never
reported anything or the Sort because never con-
suited HIM about II and never had anything to do
with The GOodencugh suit
Q. WHAT is there in the check books, &C.. that
would make evidence In the Goodenough SUIT? A.
don't know; never saw The answer TO the charges,
and never saw the amended complaint, and coiise.
q. Judge Reynolds, how long have you been
practising law A. / was admitted to The bar in
q. Did you ever apply for mandamus for books?
A. Never; so far as recolect for any other pur-
O. Don't you know you can subpoena books in
court as you can persons! A. don't know, and am
inclined to accept Mr. yanderpoels version OF the
law in the case as given here on saturday
The Rev. Mr.. Buckley corroborated Judge Rey-
nolds In regard to the refusal OF Dr. Carlton TO give
him access TO the books. The defence then called
Dr. Lanahan to testify TO the relations the two
agents since Dr. LaDahan's appointment to ONCE.
But Mr. Fancher objected TO go back the food for
testimony to be brought forward IN this There
is mere q Glrect Issue which they must try. This
point of denial OF access 10 books and papers was
never brought to issue until October 1870 when the
committee, after susDeniing Dr. Lanahan, made an
order allowing him such access, and ever SINCE he
has mad the reest access.
Judge Reynolds took the ground that as coagent
DR.. Lanahan had as fun right to examine any
books or papers OF the Concern as Dr.. Ca lton and
they proposed now to snow that prior to October,
1870, DIR. Lanahan mad had no suci right Dr.. Ian
connected with the Goodenough suit, aud his re-
peated application 10 Dr. Carlton for the books Tor
his defence, and tho la,ters refusal OF the same.
FOUR DAYS BEFORE THE MANDAMus
was applied for he made an application again and
ahanl might take any book he pleased TO court when
needed. AT the same time DR.. Carlton asked what
Dr. Lanahan expected to prove from the books IN
the Goodenough sult, TO which DR.. Lanahan replied
that Cartons relations TO GoodenOugh were such
that he tI.anaian) could not reply At this point
Upon reassembllng DR.. Lananan continued his
evidence In similar strain but much more in de-
TAIL but with very few material facts being ecitcd.
The range OF evidence was so wide and so inmate
rial thar counsel for the prosecution had frequently
to object and finally 10 for decision frOGl the
Chairman, who decided the evidence irrelevant.
u Have you been engaged In any other business
hefes A. None except what the Church has as.
signed me.
q. You have not been engaged In speculatlons in
real estates A. No, sir.
q. Nor III oil companies? A. No SIR; but oil COM
panIes
HAVE BEEN ORGANIZED ~ THE p )OR CONCERN.
DIR. Lanahan then continued TO delail how Mr..
Grant had rudey refused TO give him books or even
10 allow hlin 70 place them IN The SAFE where they
were usually KEPT, when he got through with them
In the evening" Notwithstanding he had given re.
ceIpts therefor aud was personally liable In case
the books should be lost or injured In any way;
he never wished to take book out OF the
establishment, ana never did, except two old
stumps OF order books which he brought from Null
berry street to SOS Broadway and laid before the
committee as corroboraiye evidence OF his previous