New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-11-24
THE TRIAL OF MCDONALD.
REVIEW OF TIE TESTIMONY ON BOTH SIDES
MEN SUSPECTED OF COMPLETELY IN THE FRAUDS
HOW THE APPOINTMENT WAS SECURED

aid finished and before you receive this letter the YER
dict may be known. review Of the case may not he
unintercstng.
"Con" Megrue the first witness, is not very trust
worthy person. his own conduct shows lie testihcs
that, having been invited by Mcdonald and Joyce he
came to st. Louis in 1871 and organized the whisky
Ring, acting it confidential agent, and receiving
share OF the plumber He named the other partici-
pants in 1871 and 1872. Mcdonald Joyce, Mckee Tor
himself and Mckee for Ford but testified that at one
tmc upon complaint by Mcdonald that the amount paa
was not enough, he gave Mcdonald $1,000 more imam
his usual share. Macklo Thompson, the next witness,
testified that he had no personal conversation WIN
Mcdonald about money matters but described the frauds
detail stated the amounts paid by him, and repeated
what he told by Joyce Leavenworth'
and Mcerue about he division or the money,
and their account agreed with that given by
Megrue himself Mr. Bevs of the largest dsiiley mere,
testified 30 the fraudulent arrangement made with Me
ue IN 1871 to many conversations about with Joyce,
and to one conversation with Mcdonald himself In loIZ
and particularly to McDonald's knowledge % the ar
rangement by which favorable report was obtained
from Special Agent Brasher by paying him $4,000.
Then Frazer the partner Of Bcyis, swore that after
raising 50 900 prevent seizures, AT the suggestion OF
Fzroy demanded its return because the dstileres
were nevertheless seized but Mcdonald replied that
Fzroy should not he blamed because time enough had
been secured for disers TO get rd OF thef
crooked whisky The next witness Andrew Megrue,
brother OF Con" Megrue. testified that when he was
running dlstiery, Mcdonald knew that 1t was making
Illicit whisky, and occasion came To the distery
and asked why in they did not make more of il, be
cause the thing was paying well enough Clric an
other dstiler. testified as 10 sums pald 10
Megrie and Fzroy, agreeing with Their statements
Thorpe United states storekeeper testified 20 sums
collected from distilers and paid TO Joyce, and to the
Of Joyce as TO its DIVISION therein agreeing
with Megrue and Ftzroy
Tho hinls 4.
Mcdonald and Joyce both the Of men to whom the
stolen money paid that he had conversations Win
Mcdonald ~ TO the crooked" dsting, ana at NJ one
time Mcdonald demanded special collection OF $1,000
for information furnished and directed witness 10 throw
il over the transom OF McDonalds door into his room at
the hotel and that he did lie also testified that the
funds were divided by Mcdonald himself when Joyce
WAS absent, and that Mcdonald urged him to reveal
nothing when he testified before the Grand jury In May
The next day Engelke, recter testified la the fraudu-
lent operations into which lie was forced to the pay
mcnts made the statements Of Leayenworth Joyce
and Titzoy as the division Of the money but not to
any personal conversations with Mcdonald. MI
Jouctt distlllcr testified 10 his payments to
Thorpe, Everest, and McFall, and to Their asscr-
tons that Mcdonald and others were IN the kihg'
Tcusehcr testified the orders received from Joyce to
make crooked" whisky to his payments, and to one IN
terview with Mcdonald, at which, after seeing how
much Of the stun was being made there Mcdonald said
II
testified as Ia payments made to Joyce and notice re-
ceyed from him the coming of special agents Sew
eral witnesses testified as to the details o! frauds
payments made and the general understanding that the
Illicit work protected 10y the Supervise not bringing
home knowledge Of the matter to him. but corroborang
I'm all essential respects the statements OF the cef Wit
pesses Thus six wnesses-the two Megrues, Fitzroy,
Reys Frazier and Ieusch ertCsttcd to personal CON
yersations with Mcdonald showing his knowledge OF the
frauds while they were sustained az 10 the WORKINGS OF
the conspiracy and the persons engaged in 1t by the
confessions Of Joyce, Leavcnworth and others, as re-
peated by other witnesses.
To meet this array testimony the defense produced
eight witnesses 10 the general good character oil MELON
aid one Gen. Boynton) who testified that Mogllc was
not n man Of truth and ycIacity; four, McKee, New
comb. Magnire, aud Patrick whose testimony was only
In denial OF their reported connection with the Ring or
knowledge OF it and one, Mr. Rogers Deputy Commits
sioner OF Internal Revenue who stated on crosseXam
nation that Mcdonald protested against the in'estga
ton of affairs in his district without his knowledge 1t
was also shown that all the important witnesses for the
prosecution under indictment. or course, II test-
mony by person who has engaged IN fraud II worthless
no conspiracy 10 dcfraud the Government can ever be
proved. But the testimony Of witnesses againt Me-
Donald Is convincing mainly because it accOfds at every
vital pon; with that of many other witnesses who traced
the workings Of the conspiracy but had personal
knowledge OF McDonaJs part III II, and because II
affords a rational explanation OF events winch would
otherwise he absolutely inexpicable. Here score
of men engaged IN robbng the Government every day
for years. IN full belief that they were paying Mcdonald
share Of the plumber. and convinced of that 10
the end by the treatment they received from
him and his subordinates. II Dc had not
been concerned In the fraud some OF those
who paying money for hin would surely nave
found IL out in one way or another
The exceeding weakness of the defense e1ees general
surprise but rather unreasonaby From their nature,
the onses charged hard To prove but harder To dis
prove; and respecting the charge OF conspiracy espe
cially the must necessarily rest mainly on the
strength or weakness OF the affirmative proof FOR mega
tive proof is not to expected. An attempt to destroy
the credbty all the important witnesses for the
prosecution would failed palpably and 1t was prob
ably judcous assa them in no other way than by IN
Producing the indictments against them These snow
that they had perured themselves or otherwte violated
law In dcfrsudng the Government but 1t rested with
the Jury to say whether their confessions OF the con
rpiracy in which they engaged were therefore
worthless az evidence II they entitled TO belief
tho evidence is very strong only against Mcdonald
and joyce but also against Mckee, to whom f1tzroy
swears that he 81 800 paid from the stolen fund
Mckee admonshing I'm to remember that this was
sacred thing" One other witness also swears to con-
yersatons with him the subject Against Mcguire no
direct evidence introduced, nor was necessary In
the trial OF Mcdonald Neither Is there evidence yet to
crmnato Avery for the statements Of Joyce 10 dstlers
in gard TO the sources OF information at Washington or
the amounts thithe not by themselves evidence
worthy Of weight Statements respecting Babcock,
| Patrick Neweomb and others, stand for the pres
ent on the same foundation, for the authorship
OF letters shown by Joyce, signed Bab" and alleged by
him TO be from Gen. Babcock is not established BY any
other evidence. Everybody realizes that the lawyers