The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-02-16


Mr. Storrs-An important difference.
Colonel Brodhead-I was going TO remark that
In the Mckee case but only told us that would be
better thai we had all our own testimony in before in
Judge DilIon-which was done
Colonel Brodhead-which was done
Judge Dllon-And then we allowed the declarations
AN ADVANTAGE GAINED BY TUX DKFKscK
Colonel Brodhead-Of course, II Your Honors admit
that that was the ruling -
Judge Dllon-There Is no dispute about the law APP
pica0le 10 this question Is not commended mere by
counsel for the government that anything that
Mr. Joyce said unless the assumption mat
II 10 established by other testimony 70 the
satisfaction OF the jury that the defendant here was
member OF the conspiracy has any eyldentlal iorce
against him. You have all the other testimony-that
rs, you have in the shape OF kilograms ana IN the
shape of statements of witnesses OF their own know
edge. Now their testimony as 10 the declarations OF
Joyce offered the independent purpose OF showing
that the defendant neced with this conspiracy
as counsel understand very well, rs not competent
except on the assumption that the DEFENDANTS
connection with the conspiracy Is Otherwise shown.
Now, the object OF this testimony as II seems to both
OF US for the legitimate purpose OF showing the
nature Of this conspiracy, but for the purpose by ind
recton do what the law will not permit directly TO
be done-namely TO show the defendants elimination
with the conspiracy. Now the Court has discretion
such 70 admit such testimony or testimony OF
this character, on the assumption that 1t may finally DO
shown that the defendant connected with the con-
spiracy and therefore the statement OF one OF the
conspraors with another in the execution or further
OF the scheme would be competent but II Is true
that the regular is and, the books say the
advisable course in cases OF this KIND 10 require hht
connection 10 be first established and If there ever
where that should be done rs case
of this character the character OF this man Joyce,
the obvious purpose which he seems 70 have mani
tested this case his forcing the dstilers TO make
Illicit whiskey the bold and defiant character OF his
operations here, make It extremely dangerous 10 re-
this kind of testimony. 40 not know what he
might have said. He might have undertaken TO imph-
cate the judicial officers OF the government, and
would tremble for the reputation OF the Court It was
10 be implicated upon the mere declaration OF this man
carrying ont his scheme and we think that the tes-
mony as 10 his mere declarations ought not 70 DO re-
THE NEW ORLEANS RING PoREwARSED.
j. J. Brooks, formerly Revenue Agent but now As
sstant Chief Of the Secret Service Division OF the
Treasury Department testified and corroborated Com
missioner Douglass account OF his Efforts TO unearth
frauds here in 1874 giving the Same dates of consua
tions, interviews letters kilograms visits TO washing
ton Philadelphia, &C, by himself and Hoge as were
given by Mr. Douglass; he also described bis visit TO
New Orleans and detection OF frauds there IN
April 1874 and subsequently his detection OF
frauds by Bevs and Frazer, Of this city.
On cross examination he said lie had some suspicious
OF Hoge's integrity by OF reports which came 70
him while at New Orleans; Hogc had failed TO meet
HIM at the appointed time, and did not reach New
Orleans until two days after he the Witness had seized
the dstilleries there; there evidences At New
Orleans that dngs Of their visit had been received in
advance; again, when he and Hoge in ST. LOUIS,
examining Bevis and Frazers affairs, Hoge did some
things which he witness, thought rep
rehensible no associated with Fitzroy too
much and went around with distiilers; he did not
know, however, that Hoge was furnishing In ormaon
to dlsters here at that time, nor did he know that
Fitzroy others engaged In conspiracy 10 de-
fraud the government witness knew The handwriting
oil Hoge, and had seen him write.
On redirect examination Colonel Dyer asked the
witness by what means he thought the disters in
New Orleans obtained advance information OF his RAID
upon them and the defence objected and the question
was not pressed. But the witness said answer TO
other questions that several persons in Washington
other than Commissioner Douglass knew he and Hoge
were going there
Colonel Dyer then offered some kilograms in cipher
which the defence claimed confidential dispatches
between counsel and chent After examining them
sent from here by Mr.. Luckey, the Presidents
Secretary, TO General Babcock during the Mckee trial.
and understood to refer almost wholly to business
matters between Krum and General Babcock as his
client
THE AVERY DISPATCHES
Colonel DYER then offered what known rs the
"Avery dispatches " IN evidence, and they
admitted Some Of them have been published before,
but show their connection they are repeated
here
ST. Louis, Nov. %, 1873.
W. O. AVERY, Washingtou-
Did you get my last letter with encosure3 JOYCE.
WASHINGTON, Nov. "a, 1873.
JouN A. JOYCE, ST. Louis
Letter with enclosure received W. o. AVERY.
WASHINGTON March O. 1874
II sickness of your family prevents you going West,
r. A. Hoge may pay you visit. MACK
WASHINGTON, March II, 1874
JOHN A. JOYCE, St Louis:-
Did you receive Mack's telegram Your friends WILL
doubtless, pay you visit VIM o. AVERY.
ST LorIs March IL, 1874
Colonel WILLIAM q AVERY. Washington
Telegram received Start Sunday right for San
Francisco. All perfect here J.
ST. LOUIS, August S, 1874
Colonel WILLIAM o. AVERY, Washington
Have friends started West AGAIN. Find out. Let
me know A
ST. LouIs, August &c, 1874
Colonel W. O. AVERY, Washington:
Are friends coming Westt soc II. and give
roundings A
WASHINGTON Oct. II, 1874
JONI A. JoYcE, St Louis:-
Your friend is in New York and may come ont to see
you AVERY.
ST. LOUIS, Oct 49, 1874
Colonel W. O. AVERY Washington
Give me something positive on movement of friend
Act surely. Prompt A.
In regard to the despatch signed "Mack" the Court
said to the jury-There IS no evidence before you as
TO who sent 1t or in whose handwriting 1t 49,
MISSING
Colonel Dyer then said:I the Court please, in ref
erenoe 10 the dispatches Your Honor holds, which
have not been admitted in evidence, dated December
and s. 1874, the government is not prepared
with evidence prove the handwrit-
ing Of the received them and receipted for
them in Washington, but will tomorrow. certainly
by the next day, aud the gentlemen the other side
kindly consent that the witness when he arrives may
be introduced during the hearing of their side OF the
think with the examination Of that witness
the government will rest IT'S case with the understand
ing that the gentlemen will allow all evidence necessary
TO establish the receipt of those Two dispatches TO be
introduced hereafter
The Court then adjourned.
THE CASE OF THE DRFExcR
Williams VIII speak several hours tomorrow, and
who the FIRST witness for the defence will be has yet
been announced William o. Avery is still here walt
ing 70 be called ms a witness He will testify 10 Bah
cocks complete innocence. The prosecution VI he is
put upon the stand intend to offer letters from his
wife 10 BOWS aud Frazier In which she gave them
warning of the approaching visit OF agents
Only In the last few days has the prosecution
tanned that Avery used 70 employ his wife for writing
such letters to the ring" Luckey and Snifen will
also be witnesses for the Defence
PAPERs POSSESSED By MRS
fact belonging to the secret history Of this great
trial that MAJOR Grimes not only received letters TO
Mcdonald from Babcock under cover 10 himself but
that IN July of last year Babcock wrote ask him
ascertain whether Avery would be indicted In
order to ind out Grimes went to Dyer who told him
that matter belonging wholly 70 the Grand Jury.
startling story, coming from a highly trustworthy
gentleman who one OF the former counsel for the
''rngn and therefore behind the scenes worthy Of
mention. IL will be remembered that Mrs.
Joyce, nearly two months ago, visited her
husband at Jefferson City and that her
trunks seized and searched for certain papers,
but that the detectives failed 10 ind anything whatso
except a choice assortment OF dresses and mi-
merry rhe why the detectives failed to end any