, 1874-10-11
~. E,arwel1's Expertness at
Poker Vindicatcd.
s.Reminiscence Of O. F. Brad
lev Ex.Chief Of Police.
An Interview with Hugh Maher.
q. f!1o;ms that He Was Cheated Gut Of
Eighty Acres Of Land at Draw
Poker.

HrroRE JUDGE WILLIAMS
lmo,joa ras ua1e yesterday morning before
,,aa. H,11iams, in the case OF j1ane1 rs. FAR
Vii to open the depositionB for the complain
a.. heretofore taken in the case before
sot.rr Public. -Ir. Perkins made the notion
.tzt;nq that be was one Of the defendants, but
th,t his solicitor, 3fr Le Moyne, had felt obliged
h 1urs the case, owing to the present conph-
z,o1s Of Affairs, and representation thas
,olitica1 effect Was Que Of his objects in the
..s,. The case, Mr. Perkins said, nas Set Tor
rial the third Monday of this month: and it WAS
,soes,ary to hare the dispositions opened to
1,log him to examine them.
Ha CAULEFIELp
then sro.e and remarked that, as far as his client
g.s concerned. he had no objection, but he had
given his word that scme OF the depoatlons
eaoald not be made public Some OF the wit
pe.ses had given their testimony on concltion
that it should be kept secret. He Esd at that
line letter from gentleman who begged that
his testimony shou1d not be used; that he never
would have gi5en his testimony If be had known
it was to be published Tho HANG Of this wit
ness mss afterward ascertained to be Michael
Iu1ney.]
GEN. SMITH
strongly objected to having the dispositions
opsned. He, however, thought that it necessary.
those Of Pope, Lyon, and Nhiteman might be
ooened. They were in lis opinion the only ma
ts1il uitneeaes tho others only testify as to
hesrssy. and their evidence was Irrelevant. He
thought The Court had just as much right to con-
fnn] deposihons Is 20 control testimony II an
;mnroper question was asked a witness in open
oourt, tae Judge would lave the power to teltho
witness not to aoswe- the question, and
in the present instance il the Court should sec
ih.t improper evidence would be given it should
. t.op it. Gu the other hand, if the Court should
70 beyopd its powers, the Injured party would
have 1nenrs to compel the production OF tho
testimony By uaDdanus or some other means,
"a in the case OF = bill Of exceptions. The 0ou-
e1al did not think his client. Mt. FarNeL, was rs
much concerned As eome other parties are !: that
il tie dispositions we're opened they would injure
him much. Besides several of the Witnesses had
said that they did not suppose their
testimony would be- published as
tbeE gave it; that they had SAID many things
not supposing that shorthand writer waa tax
ing them down, and desired to correct thoee
statements. He therefore thought the Judge
ought to take the testimony and peruee it, and
if, IL his opinion, it Should be published, he
Eould haye no objection. But he thought that
sorae Of the witaesses should bo re-e1amlned, Is
they claimed their testimony ras incorrect in
many respects. In support Of his posi-
ton Gen. Smith then read m atdda-
ut signed by himself to the effect
that he had heard the testimony Of the Witness
:s. and that those mentioned above were the
onty uatet1A onea, and tha: much OF the evi-
deneo OF the others WIS immate1ial and u1eIe-
Eant-
Just then
A1ETEa
wss handed the speaker, which ran as follows:
oc4og.n 10. 1874.
GEy. 5H1H: Mr. Turncy has just notified mo that
n did not s"esr to biz deposition, and that there is
aoy 5afst attached 1t il fslse-
:asA@! .. .. fAn~E1h~
4, al. cau1neid tnen rose to explain. nany OF
tae N'hesees' he said, had found large number
u passagos which they Wished expurgated. be-
et, etase, u they claimed, they we're uua"are
ne! soasped in WAY which would not bear rep
oas'on. s. ho had accordingly allowed tnem to cut
~ euca passages before signing It,. In regard
s"eAs saa1. letter. Just read BY Gen. Smith, he
,.snt Neteo t tnat !u1ney would make such state
'seh asna9q; young man. and would not dare to do
.ho represented three Of tue dsfendants. TO
MARKED that the depositions should be opened
.s:tase the bill had charged a1l the defendants
. tne record With notice Of the want Of equity
toe hzst conveyance to Farweil. He had.
ISe.e'o1e, tight to know what testimony wss
.,': Hsen % support the allegations BY the CON-
:sensnts Owl acknowledgements the evidence
10 70 oeen changed. aud who knew nom what 1t
~ n.,e o. no" much 1t resembled. what was orig
Etosssas s ssa. moreover, some OF TIE defendant
...oesses : we're non-rcsidents, and it would be
~sesss1s on that account to see what the testl-
sus WAS to know whether to retain these wit
aeeses * to tebut IT.
~ ~ Fe1s1ns then explained LIS position sgaln,
souuecton. aud emphasized the point already
u s'ae' that the defendants did not know what
.sS .xsS;'tnon5 had been taken eioce it was altered