New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-08-05
THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL.
PROGRESS OF THE SARATOGA TRIAL-DAVID
DUDLEY FIELD on THE srAND-BARNARDs
RAILROAD oRDERs-FOUR AsTUTE COURT
OFFICERS


yoacbment resumed to-day its examination of Hamilton
Harris who was allowed yesterday TO enter upon patc
ulars In the history Of the Albany and susqueha1na KAN
road by the ruling of the Court 1t looks now as II the
trial might be extended beyond the anticipation OF
those members Of the Court who enjoy Saratoga lne
The defense has been allowed to produce witnesses
whose evidence has 10 do with Barnards actions
than this Court has with the resolution of impeachment
Several members Of the Court are disguised with the
prospect the right Of Mr. Van Colt and his associates
10 subpoena and produce witnesses giving opposite views
of this Ramsey Church story will hardly be denied as
long as audi aeram parton continues to be judicial
maxim.
The substance of Mr. Harrs's testimony to show
that he went 10 Pouehkeepsie with MI Stirring OF the
firm OF Field q shearman TO induce Judge Barnard TO
grant certain orders in the Albany and susquehanha
case which IL turned afterward that he required no
inducement 10 make. The witness was asked how he
knew Barnard was at Poughkeepsie but he could not
remember although Of Fisk's counsel at the very
time He claimed did not go into the house, but
let Stirling take the papers and 90 ill., He was reminded
on crossexamnation that Stirling laid the burden OF
that business his (he witness') shoulders and he
then admitted that that might possibly be the case He
identified the orders OF Judge Barnard as nav
ing been issued at Poughkeepe. 1t will be noticed here
that an Of Barnards orders dated at the Court
house in Nc-Yo. that the charge in relation to this
is fairly and fully sustained
DAVID DUDLEY FIELD IN TROUBLE.
The most important witness of the day, perhaps, was
David Dudley Field whose testimony was confined to
the Albany and susquehanna railroad troubles he inn
pressed the Court with of his shrewdness, not
only as lawyer but witness for the defense and
his explanations" Of the different points which he IN
sisted could not answered by yes or no were many
and plausible while Mr. Pars0nss shrewd avoidance OF
them created many laughs at the witnesses discontinue
Mr. Beachcame in for share OF the ready repartee
which he has more than before received from Mr.
He has tried to rS S ndtr Pq 5sd te Ms ep
irritates his older but less wise opponent whose
satire as one OF tAe members 80 t,o,, Ch
Court said laughmgy awhile ago mas TO De thougnt
M" Mr. Field under the comprehensive Instructions
about this matter began history Oh tS i iI6
lions against the Albany and susquehanna Rallr0ad
Comphuy embracing Of course the Ramsey-Churc as
MATCHES interrupted short intervals by objections
from the prosecution 10 what they cohslGereI paly
Irrelevant to question at ISSUE Mr Field began by
~ Snsry ana 10 Obtain affdavs upon which to
., ie tc notion but could not state this personal
knowledge. He had been told so by MS clerks lie asO
make afHdavits. but he was not present ana had I,
no knowledge except that derived from oIhefs S ne
could even remember that ne saw the ailq anna
which went rom hls Office t. Dop nut thVuSnt Inc ne
aGnexcd was list the members Of the Credit
Mobier, list OF the stockholders copy OF ne 9y-
MS6hier but Mr. Field admitted that the list Of these
things was not actually annexed 70 tne aiuaa'ts Tr
and Fisk together in his life.
Mr. Field was asked, on cross-cKaminahon, If
Barnard never decided motions before they were
heard, and said he ala not IememDer any
such case but had TO admit that Barnard on
March 70 made the order to show cause why a re
should not be appointed rel9Inaoe on tne nrsI
ceiyer on the 18th March. Mr.. Field denied that the
suit against the Union Pacific Railroad Company had
been thwarted by lim There Is natuIal explanation
AGAINST the wishes Of Fisk's representatives. There
have and frequent hints that the suit was
course the reputation Of Mr. Field and firm Is as much
Affected by the stopping Of the suit as that of any
b,dy else 1t viii also be seen that just in
proportion as Barnards orders were WfongIu
re1rehensibe and be shown that the orders were
nadeup with statements, then Barnard Is not so
eTteced That he should testify he subsequently, did
to-day, that the snort oIeI sIaI . ~ b f t ~
was applied by the Receiver himself But he admit
sons handwriting and the inference is that be knew
b0ut H. even be did not actually ask II, 50 tnat the
reputation of Mr.. Field is Lot yet secure
A BATCH OF UNIMPoRTANT EVIDENCE.
Thomas C. Durant, director Of the Union Pacific Rail
road and President of the Credit Mober was called by
tie defense seemingly 10 prove that the words III refer
eDce TO driving scOundrels out Of the State attributed
10 Judge Barnard quoted by the witness and not
used by Barnard on the bench but he stated positively
that he told Barnard that he had beard the Company
had been threatened with expulsion from the state an1
Barnard said he supposed he alluded to remark made
at the House. quoting IT, There was no cTosseA-
Hamilton W Robinson, Judge Of the Court of Common
Pleas testified reference the Ncw-fOrk pier ald
warehouse litigation but there was nothing new IN ms
Jno f. Dcyelin was examined in reference TO Barnards
order preventing the Iammany society Ifoni eAcludhS
ii
nisappreeusOn that he was the counsel VINO made he
applcatiOn be said he not the one, althOughJ
Was one Of bis He stated that when the continuing
OF the injunction came before Judge barrett IOr aIRu-
VduderpOel, for the society claimed mat Bar
nard had right 10 grant the injunction as nc was
member the society Judge Barrett so held and set
Injunction. On cross examination an interest
ing fact was developed in reference TO the custom OF
granting orders in YORK MI DeVAh cOui ho' utny
Judges Ingrdham Sutherland Brady, ana BARRETT
generally looked over the papers before lLGy slshtd
Them but ne did not thuh Barnard ala ana udu Aho"
anything about CardOzo.
BARNARDs FAITHFUL RErAINERs.
At the conclusion Of Mr. Develins examination the de-
fence called four Of Barnards henchmen. who ofciaed
IN his court a. attendants-Neas Hope, Valentine, aud
Buchanan Their testimony extremely important to
those members OF the who possibly be inter
ested in chronological developements Here was var
alton OF intellect.-though there is doubt II that
phrase accurately dercribes the phenomena-in
four successive witnesses, which Is rare,
y TO be met with. sG glne LA has ,aTe D
relative the strait 10 which the deieuse must nave
been driven 10 call these gentemen Dut no poseIHer %
facial xpressiOn could possibly fail 10 see the point IN
tended 10 be made by Mr. Beach, which was the appa
rent uneasness which the quartette exhibited under ex
of duty and II Il did favor Judge Barnard they
could not help u. They were eailed 10
contradict natly Judge Blrdseyes testimony IN
reference Barnards indecent talk on the bench Ac'
their testimony they were all presenter close
altered the word which could spoken aloud the
present trial and also when Judge Barnard Is SAID TO
HE state" In fact that these faithful servants
OF Justice ubiquitous but family describes
OF Judge Birdseye's testimony being true then
otherwise perfect officials have short memories for
SpsId;s 10 ANYTHING that bordered on vulgarity but
then they positively that If Judge Barnard had
s,on on their minds. UBcharitable acquaintance
euegest that at least Is perfectly true because
emf devotion 10 the subject exceedingly happy knack
repeating doubtful anecdotes IL was subject Of