New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-06-16
A BOND FORGER'S ASSOCIATES.
THE DEFENSE IN THE TRIAL OF ROBERTS.

The trial of Andrew l.. Roberts, who is in
dicted Jointly with Valentine Geeson the leader OF
the remarkably adrot bond forgeres of Ia year ago on
the securities of the NewYork Central Railroad has run
into another week. aud has fat last become somewhat
tedious and dull from the frequent repetition OF the
same kind OF evidence, the only person beside
the fudge, jury, and counsel who appears to take
any interest In the proceedings being the prisoner
himself, a Quietlookiug darkcomplexiored man
with keen eyes, who takes cOpous notes OF the testi'
mony and occasionally whispers 10 his counsel Before
the days work begun yesterday. In the oyer ana
Terminer ex-Mayor Hail. the prisoners chef COUNSEL
announced that his associate, ex-Recorder smith, had
been called Albany where he was to argue the ques-
ton of the constutionalty of the Police BILL before the
Court of Appeals Mr. Hall ded that possibly his assO-
cate would not appear again in this Judge Brady
IL will be remem bered, adjourned the last Friday,
and announced that on Monday he would decide
the question of the admissibility of testimony
regarding the grounds OF Robertss release from the
Connecticut State Prison After Mrs. Lillian Roberts,
ssternaw of the prisoner had been recalled first OF
all and had given unimportant evidence eXMayor han
said they had in readiness member OF the Legislative
Committee Connecticut testify the question Of
Robers's pardon Judge Brady then announced citing
Justice Campbes opinion, that after careful examine
tion had concluded it not proper al present 1t
mere question as to the increase OF the punish
ment he addressed TO the Judge the finding OF
fact by the jury II not at all matter in which
pardon however obtained. could properly be addressed
TO the jury at this stageof the case III might become
important If the defense put in evidence as to the
character of the prisoner but at present 1t had no rea
tions, the conviction being conceded
All of the testimony offered by the defense during the
day was directed to proving that at the time when
Olmstead. the witness who made the seal for Roberts.
and who turned against his companion by tesylDg for
the prosecution, says he met Roberts having become
alarmed at the public exposure Of tho fogeres Roberts
himself was coming from Boston and went at once TO
Wades Hotel at Seventy-nnth-st, and remained there
until Saturday. RoDerts's nephew hOrsedealer with
whom he had some dealings, Mr.. and Mrs Wade. and
one other witnesses called to establish this
point. Secondly, the defense took up Mrs. Petus's
hostile feeling towards Roberts, and TO prove TINS wit
ness named Dwyer testified that he had received
letters from Pettus, and that Mrs. Pet
tus, occasion, when he was with
her call Roberts filthy names He had spoSen TO her
about the ACCESSIBILITY OF making Col. Wood friend,
and she said she knew keeneT than Col. Wood
vino would run him down. and sue would have Roberts
IN Prison. matter what 1t cost He was sub
iected TO "A severe Examination. The last witness
was Miss McManus the domestic in ROberts's house.
merely testified Rober;ss absence from the
at some particular iime-either August or September
when the District Attorneys witness claimed 10 have
met him there.