New-York tribune., 1876-02-14
THE DAYS PROCEEDINGS.

IT. LOUIS, EtD. l0.-l pom lHt OptIilip VI
the Babcock trial yesterday the crosscxamnaton OF j.
" Douglass Commissioner Of Internal Revenue, was
completed in few ummportant questions On the re-
direct the Dstrict-Attorncy presented affidavit pur-
porting to he charges preferred IN 1873 by Lindsay Mur
dock, collector of internal revenue IN Southeast Mis-
souri, against Joyce and Mcdonald The en- 'clope was
ndolsed by C. G. snnen the Presidents private srcre-
tary showing that IL had been received at the Executive
Mansion and referred to the Treasury Department The
court only allow cd the testify that the indOrse
showed hst such charges had been reserved and
fled They we're not read Nearly the entire morning
session taken trying TO trace throu h telegraph
clerks OF this city and Washington and also by the door
keepers and OF the Executive Mansion Ger
tain teeg ans yet admitted TO prove that they were
received and sent back and forth between Joyce aud
Mcdonald here ard Gen Babcocs in Washington. Finally
the defense waived tls proof az TO one dispatch and
allowed the following, admitted to he in Gen BabcocAs
handwriting, TO he read;
WhsmScTos, d. C.. Dee. -, 1874.
Gen. john McDOSALD. ST. LOttis 30:
succeeded. They Will not 20. | will write You
Deputy Commissioner Rogers recalled and test!-
fed;
had a conversation with Gen. Babcock in regard TO
the transfer of revenue AGENTS. Gen Babcock sid he
had heard at Mr. Douglass aboH 10 issue an order
directing transfer Of agents told him the order had
that morning been issued he expressed ms regret a-h
would bring political pressure on Mr. Douglass ana r
would be lorcd to revoke tue order and tia, would
work disastIously 10 HIM Mr. Douglas was AT that time
spoken oi as candidate Or the Court OF Claims thcrc
|
on account the failure the enterprise when hc order
was revoked that interview about by ness' ne.r
bringing me either note or Il verbal communication
from Gen. BabcOck; had n0 previous conversation
wtb him on this matter; did scak to MIN before bout
the judgeshp Of the Court OF CLAIMS; there was not
word said IN Lhc conversation with Cen BaDcock al hs
house in regard to breaking mp the fraud. here Mr.
az there vacancy do not Know that the IeNok-
ing OF tne Ordcr changing su eIv'sois had cast snch
odum Mr Douglass that he not appOlntcd IN Tie
conversation with Gen. Bdbcock told Nun shouid re-
port tho interview TO MI Douglass
On e1amiuation the wtcrs said that he had two
interviews with Gen. Eabcock the first Of which lie
sought himself HIS Interior object was TO promote the
interest OF Mr. Douglass in connection with the Judge
shin OF the Court OF Claims thinking doubt he might
get the position held by hIm as Commissioners Gen.
Babcock expressed great friendship for Mr. Douglass.
The opposition Of the defense the admission Of dis
patches between Joyce, Mcdonald and Babcoc was car
ried 10 the utmost extremity they would admit moth
ing the clear proof Of which could not be produced Thc
lequired not only proof OF authorship and Transmission
Oy telegraph, but that the dispatches were actually
p ced into the hands Of tho persons 70 whom they were
addressed.
So far the prosecution have satisfied the defense only
in one instance that OF the syh telegram gwen above
The de cnss also objected to the relevancy OF these dis
patches and stated that they would argue their obec
tions at considerable length The dispat ii which met the
most determined ami persistent opposition is one cent
from St. Louis Dec 9, 1874, TO Gen Babcock Wash
ingtOn signed d." and admitted TO be In Joyces hanh
are not known ouado Of tie counsel The dispatch was
traced into the hands Of George Joyce dookcper at
the Secreiays Office, Executive Mansion, Washington
who rcccpted for IT, but Joyce ded some nonhs ago
there IS positive proof tnat Cen Babcock ever re-
ceived IT, Other dispatches traced in like manner
TO doorkeepes and Others who recepcd Tor thcn but
these persons who placed on tho stand aud testified
o receiving and rccepting for them shown by the
CENT books OF the Telegraph Company could not dcn
y the actual delivery OF any particular dis
patch to the person to whom II was addressed
fudge Dillon made a partial ruling Oh this question,
taking the same ground he did the other day when de-
| cidng about the admission OF the testimony OF Mr..
Eyere regarding the mailing OF letters TO Mcssrs Bah
cock and Avery with money Enclosures, declaring that
the evidence proper TO be laid before inc jury IL
was then agreed that the dispatches should be grouped
together and that the question OF Their delivery @c
and their relevancy. should be argued at the same e
At the opening OF afternoon session. the counsel on
both sides appeared with numerous law books ana pre-
pared to make their arguments as strong as possible
Several witnesses from Washington including Messis
Douglass and Rogers excused from further service
Mr. stOrs opened the argument for the defense lie sad
The paper presented has been shown, II must be
to he ai L. there Is any occult meaning that mast
be shown before the paper be accepted The bench
cannot present Il paper out OF which Innocence may
appear or guilt be guessed at until 1t snail be shown
which II tue meaning Here are put IN telcgiam tho
most susceptible OF all documentary evidcnce TO dsor
ton The produced cannot be receN ed evidence
because they show an intimacy between Joyce and Nc
Donald and the defendant. Because men have been in
mate In years past and the guilt OF las suddenly
been discovered he guilt OF the other cannot be proved
by apy documents like abbreviated kilograms and the
Kind OF evidence sought 10 be introduced Inc trouble
the Court aud jury will fail to put themselves IN
| the defepdant's position. 1t Is not enough that
| 1t must be shown that these dispatches were sent
| by this defendant TO this corrupt combination
Ii that this defendant knew VI ths cor
ruption before this telegram becomes admissible Gen.
Babcock indicted for giving information TO Messrs
Mcdonald, and Il s not unlawful for them 10
| ask for him To communicate such information 10
make such inquiries Illegal the prosecution must nrst
prove that Aesss Joyce and Mcdonald asksd this Of
en Babcock from corrupt motives and purposes that
they corrupt men that the defendant 10 or was
corrupt man, and knew the eorrlpt purp0sss sought ey
Aessrs Joyce and Mcdonald. Ar. 6torrs cited number
Of authoriss without reading them, and In oonolnsen
t,in without kilograms 3D.