The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1873-05-16

through that way, or tip 1t fht
other end up, and go drought thai
lscdyP' bs Ah
For once 1 had the whole couri
with me in a laugh, in which
Judge, jury, lawyers, and specta,
tors took eager part; and my in.
| quisitor dashed his papers on the
table, and dropped into his seat
During the last trial / had ties,
tilted that i knew tickets had been
used backwards on the road, and
l believed such usage amounted
TO custom. My tormentor asked
why did not bring witnesses to
prove such . custom. l replied,
that we did introduce a witness
for that purpose, but the defend
ants counsel refused to permit
MIN to testify, declaring that the
custom of the road had nothing
TO do with the case; only the rule
of the road was to be considered.
The counsel denied this, and af-
firmed that he would not have OBJ
jected to such testimony, if we had
been able to pro it. A gen
tleLlan sitting among the specta-
tors rose and whispered to my
lawyer; and as soon as left the
witness stand, he was called and
sworn, the opposing counsel
watching the proceeding with IN
disguised curiosity. MIR. Wit
ness" asked my lawyer, "you have
travelled q good deal on the New
York and New Haven railroad,
have you not?" ayes, sir"
estate whether or not you ever
had any tickets to go in the re-
verse direction, and how they were
marked"
Before the witness could an
swer, the counsel for the railroad
sprang up and vehemently protest
ed against the introduction of the
evidence. The judge evidently did
not comprehend the situation, and
turned an inquiring look upon my
lawyer, who answered it by say
ing, Your Honor, the defendants
have asked me why we did not
call witnesses to prove the custom
of using tickets backward, and
said that they should not object if
we did so. Now we have put this
gentleman on the stand TO show
that he had such tickets ''Yes,
and used them too" interrupted
the witness. "Stop, sirr' cried
the Judge, .'you are not to testify
until you are told to do 500 But the
caution was too late; the mischief
was done; and again all present,
approaching the humor of this
breach of legal etiquette, united
in hearty laugh. 1t was plainly
unnecessary to pursue the exam
nation of this witness further, and
he was permitted to stand aside.
The other witnesses for the
plaintiff, ladies and gentlemen who
were in the car at the time of my
election, gave their evidence on
each trial, clearly and impressive
ly, corroborating my own in all
material points, and resisting sue
eessfully the diligent efforts of the
opposing counsel to lead them
into standardization and con-
fusion. They, too, were badgered
and brow beaten, as / had been;
and their plight in the grasp of
the cross examining lawyer,
though not edifying, was instruc-
tive in so far as it proved that the
law is noSrespecter of persons.
All the evidence for the plaintiff
having been put in, the defend
ants counsel opened their case in
a brief speech, in which he quiet
ly assumed, and seemed to take
the jury into partnership in the
assumption, that / had deliberate
ly laid n plan to cheat the railroad
company, and coolly stigmatizcd
my suit for redress as q "fraud.'
He then introduced his witnesses
-"the honest, Woodworking men
who had been styled 'roughs' by
the other side" and whose advent
was now witnessed by the specta-
tors with ill-concealed amusement.
The contrast, in fact, between the
witnesses for the two sides of the
case was too glaring to be ignored.
The first honest witness was as
prompt as n well-drilled recruit.
He described the incidents of my
election: the conductor called
upon HIM and some of the other
'boys" to take q man out of the
car; they attempted to carry out
his order quietly, but the man re-
fused to go; therefore they laid
gentle hands on him, whereupon
the man kicked and struck and
bit, and he (the witness) had to
take hold of the mans hands to
restrain his violence. He swore
positively that it took six men to
move the man. In answer to an
inviting question, he eagerly tes-
titled that he saw Mr.. Coleman
bite one of the boys on the arm
right through the wooden garment
that the man wore, sgThe story
was clear, concise, and told with
an air of confidence that was quite
impressive. mir. Witness said
my lawyer, beginning the cross
examination, '.you said just now
that you saw Mr.. Coleman bite
one of the men." 'sfYes, sir; on
the arm. (which ARM The
witness hesitated; he was well pre-
pared in gencralities, but not in
details. Presently he answered,
THE left arm, How many men
had hold of Mr.. Coleman at this
timeE" "Ohe man was on his left
side and another on his right. others
had him by his legs, and 1 was in
front" These men were abreast
of Mr.. Coleman, taking him out
squarely through the car, were
they? " g Yes, sir.'' Will you
swear to that positiyely?" I" Yes
sir" said the witness, resolutely
Careful, now; are you sure Of
that" Yes. SIR; l am sure Of
it," d" On which side of Mr.. Cole
man was the man who was bitten?
Again the witness hesitated, anC
his face hitherto calm, grew flushed
and anxious. But he answered a
last, The left side, SIR vii
you swear positively to that also?
!" Yes, sir: swear positively t.
it." Now sir" resumed the law
yer, lido You not know that a mai
of Mr.. Coleman's breadth in tina
narrow carlisle would completed,
fill it, so that neither two men no.
one could stand at his side, as vol
swear they did:' frustrated, bu
not daunted, the witness explained
1.-THE men were o little back G
Mr.. Coleman" and witness quitte'
the stand, leaving the court to med
itate on the strange spectacle Of
man curving his giraffe like necl