Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1874-01-25
His Examination before Justice SPELL
man Yesterday, Charged with
EmbezzlemeRt.
Evidence Of DIR. Fraime, President Lang
STAFF, Mr.. ]. W. Smith, and vii.
liam MARus, COlOred.
The Prisoner Admitted to Bail in the
Sum Of $4,000 for Trial be-
fere the Criminal Court.

IL
stationhouse, was thronged with q crowd
persons anxious 70 witness the
EXAMINING TRIAL OF A. G. REYNAUI
asAistant-secretary OF the Howard association
whoi as stated in yesterdays APPEAL, hs
been arrested at the instance OF A. D. Lane
stan, president Of the Memphis Howard assI
elation. Among the spectators were MeSsr
Rhodes, Aansford. Lonsdale, DR.. Fraime, an
oIher members of the Howard association
Mr.. Reynaud appeared IN court with his at
lorney, I. b, Horrtgan, the prosecution bein
Howard association, and Mr.. S. Cannon.
THE WARRANT OF ARREST
read as follows:
State Of Tennessee, Shelby county:
Before me personally appeared A. ID. Lang
stan, and made oath that A. @. Reynaud did
on the twenty-thlrd of January, 1874, In saiC
} county, and within the Jurisdiction of tn,
criminal court Of Shelby county, feloniouslJ
and frauoulently appropriate moneys to tho
5 amount OF three thousand dollars, more ol
less, the property OF the Howard association
and did appropriate The same 10 his use
against the peace and dignity of the State
sworn 10 and subscribed before me the
tWenty-third day Of January, 1874:
JOHN SPELMAN, ]. p.
1HE WRIT AMENDED.
The warrant was amended by inserting after
the name OF A. j. L4ngstaf the words 'presi-
dent OF the Howard association" Mr.. Lang
staff was then sworn, and the justice said
"Ar, LangStah, come up and explain what
you know about the charges preferred"
WHAT Mr.. LANGSTAFF KNEW.
Mr.. GammOn-Mr. Bangstaf, tell when you
first had any cause TO suspect the defendant.
Mr.. LangstaH-The first intimation / had
was from Mrs. Reynaud, his wife, who came
to me and told me-
Mr.. Horrigan here objected to this evidence,
Mr.. Cannon said the court could have all
the evidence and exclude what was improper.
He wanted a iull Investigation.
A PLAIN QUESTION OF Law.
Nv obi 20
the evidence OF the defendants wife, who
could not testify Tor or against her husband.
This was well settled rule, and required no
( argument. The declaration not being made
/ in the presence of the defendant, could not
! be used against him, even II she were not his
/ wife. 1t was only a declaration. Because
] this was merely an examining trial IL did not
authorize the admission OF any but legal evi-
dence. The court could not act on no evi-
dence save that which was admissible for
I jury, and should be governed by no other.
Mr.. Cannon said he wanted the declara-
motives that induced Mr. Langstan and
others, who received the information, to in
terview the defendant in regard TO the matter
Justice spelnan-Proceed Mr.. Langstaf
with your statement.
Mr.. Langstaff-My first intlmation was a
visit from Mrs. Reynaud, his wife
illegal evidence?
Justice s-I want TO hear all the evidence.
Mr.. H.-For what?
Justice S.-BecRuse want to hear it.
Mr.. Horrtsau sgain objected on the ground
OF the wife's declaration being ipadmlssi bIe
Mr.. Gammon-I deny she is his wife, say
Justice s.-What have you got to say now
Mr.. HOrrigan. [Laughter.l
Mr.. Horrigan-It makes no difference
whether she be his wife or not. It is merely
declaration made in the absence of the de-
fendant by party who is stranger TO the
prosecution. He continued and said if IL
were sought TO make her witness, then the
question would arise as 10 the eligibility of the
witness, which would depend upon the fact
that she not his wife
Mr.. Cannon insisted. upon this evidence,
though not admissible before q jury, in order
" and ascertain the motives that actuated
the prosecution.
Nr. Horrigan said It was strange the Justice
would be actuated by evidence which was not
legal, as a sworn Judge. The oath Of office
obligated him 10 be governed only by legal
evidence. He was there to speak plainly
upon this subj ect which should not be treated
IN a nlppant manner. 1t seemed to him that
the attorney for the defense wanted to pro-
law would be violated when illegal evidence
was admitted. 1t was sought 20 drag out the
9eelsrallohs aolnltDe1; which, II pnDllshed In
character forever.
Justice spelman-I propose to hear the case
in full, and Mr.. UangAtsff-s statement, so as to
have q full Investigation.
MI. Anderson-There is no disposition on
our part 10 make sensation for the newspa-
pers.
Mr.. Anderson said that no man enjoyed
more confidence and esteem in the Howard
association previous 10 the time these charges
were preferred. he proceeded TO give his
reasons why heresay evidence of the charac-
ter OF this declaration was aduaissi BILE before
"a jury. The declaration was necessary to a
full and complete Investigation OF the case I
Mr.. Reynaud had no relative or friend on I
earth VINO would be more gratified at his In
rest was psinful matter, and he came there /
merely TO see that the association was vindi- /
Gated by full investigation.
Mr.. LANGsTAFF CONTINUES.
substance being as follows: Mrs. Reynaud /
came 10 me few days ago. and said some one /
had been treating her badly, aud that parties /
had been taking money fIom the association 4
who had DO right TO take IL. she refused TO I
mention the names OF the parties. She re- (
fused to tell me- and veni away, but returned /
next morning. The witness then stated that I
William Thomas, porter formerly employed :
in the Office of the Howard association, e allied
had taken twelve hundred dollars from his
pocketOOOk. IL was part OF three thousand
or thirty-nye hundred dollars, he didn't re-
member, that he had taken from the Howard
association, by means OF false entries She
did not know whether or not 10 take il, and
hesitated about receiving the money. She
Insisted upon witness receiving it, because
her husband might give IL to a woman TO
whom he had already given money.
Mr.. Horrigan interrupted the witness, and
wanted him TO state what he Lsngstafi) said
TO Mrs. Reynaud.
Tie witness said he took the money TO hold
for her until he could satisfy himself of Re-
nauds uilt. In the evening she came 10 him
and said be had better give the money 10 some
one who would not give II to her husband.
association, who advised him to retain the
money, he 80 informed her. She left and re-
turned in about fifteen minutes with VIM.
Thomas, and said he was there and could in
form him Of the matter. He invited William
In the Office, and afterward saw Mrs Remand
at Court square, but no important converse
ton ensued.
Questionable you see the defendant there?
WitneSS---Hes, sir
uaaftnu-Gtata xuhaf ha xrao aoS,n
The witness said Mrs. ReynRud said abe was
going 10 walk home with him. Colonel An
derson said, There's Renaud now" She
said, "My God, don't leave u.s."
Witness told her she need not be
afraid OF Remand. Remand, when he
saw them, hid behind q door, and moved of
the sidewalk. Witness and the other two
were at pr. Armstrong; office, Second street,
between Court square and jefferson street.
Colonel Anderson that they have private
with Reynaud, They went 20
the Howard ONCE and witness told him they
we're acsuated by brotherly love, and told him
they had been Informed he had taken money
Of tha association and given IL 20 a woman.
was astonisned, and said he had
defendant II he had had one thousand dollars
daring the last week, and told him It's expla-
nation would remove all doESt o. Innocence,
Defendant said that was his business. he
was acting secretary.
Question-H0w Yves money usually re-
leived?
through persons, and by every possibls way
Il remittshos.
o.; sstion-Whose duty was It 10 receive the
money aIcd open lettersq
Wjtne<s-It stevOlved on different parties.
and Mr.. Reynaud received e at times. Gene.
raj Smith also received III then he was sue
ceeded by Mr.. Tyler, and hs BY some one else
oss-EXAMINATIoN.
Mr.. .Horrigsn said he bad no war to make
upon the Howard association, nor 20 cast any
reflection upon Its members.
Of the Howard associations
Witness-fes, sir.
Question-It IS an incorporated body, IL
not2
1uestiOn-During the yello w-fover epidemic
large suIGs Of money were received, were they
mott
WjtnesS-Y6s, sir.
Questicn-Do you know OF your own knows
.dSe that your association lost any money.
Witness-No, sir. There were certain
,mounts short, which would arise In any
business. The witness stated that these were
NATURAL DISCREPANCIES,
b.,ng Of a smaI amount, and were liable in
NV business. Mr.. Reynaud, while connected
with the Howard association acquitted HIM
Mr.. Rsynaud-can say one word2
Mr.. Horigan-No, siri Eant no advice IN
this ease, but can manage it without any as
The attorney for the defense then asked the
witness IL large SUMS OF money had been re-
eeiyed In letters not registered. The witness
anSEersa ~ tse sfaTmaevs; and explained