The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1876-03-08

no opportunity TO contradict what was said
is manifestiy no testimony here.
Manager Barks,iaie replied. that until .
7rizRI fdcte Gaze of conspiracy shall be made
oil between Matthews and Davis, any dec
iaration of Matthews made i'll the absence
of Davis is com petent evidence against Di-
Wis. He argued that a case of conspiracy
had not yet been mace out against Lieuren-
/ ant-GOvernor Davis, and that the question
was admissible and pertinent.
Senator Catchings then withdrew his
| question. and asked: When you handed the
+ $3.50 TO Col. Matthews. Gid you tell him he"
aud from whom you had received IL! If SO
what did YOU tell him?
/ Counsel MorTis-I object, for the same
/ reason.
i BY senator Catchings: Did you inform
/ Col Matthews what disposition You had
made of the remaining 5000?
Counsel Morris: | objrct to that.
By Senator Catchings; Have you ever in
formed Governor Davis that you reimbursed
yourself the 800 you had loaned him, out
| of the proceeds of the $3.50 check:
A. | did, sir.
Q. Why did Oh deposit the money with
Jerry Dowsing To the credit of Gen. Packer.
and why did you hand the receipt TO Gov.
Davis:
Counsel Morris arose and said: With re-
gard to the last question witness has already
answered it. There is string of questions.
however, every one of them Objectionable.
and at this point desire To say one word
as to the fairness here and to the way Sena-
tors have of getting up and putting ques-
tions that to be argued before this
Court.
Senator Chalmers called the gentleman
to order.
The Chair is under the impression that
the Senator has no right TO ask any ques-
ton Of
Couns, Morris l object to
Senator Reynold: rise TO point of or
der thaG the counsel has no right to lecture
the Senate.
The Chair thinks the point Well taken
and is also OF the opinion that the gentle
man has right to object To these questions
being asked by the Senator
Counsel Morris stated that he objected TO
Senators asking questions.
The Chair answered that the first three
questions had been withdrawn.
q. Why did you deposit the money to the
credit of Gen. Packer, and why did you
hand the receipt to Davis?
A. Since the question has been read l call
to my mind three different persons | pro-
posed to deposit with. MY object was to
deposit the money in some safe hands out
of mine, ana that is why | deposited with
DoWsing
Q. why did you hand the receipt to Da-
Wis?
A l got the receipt late on Sunday even
ing. and L went home with il in my possess
wanted to get it out of my possession, and
when | saw Davis on Monday morning, /
handed it TO him and said: There's the re-
ceipt.
BY Senator Chalmers Was ever any OBJ
lection made by Mr.. Packer tc the taking
out of this 500 by you?
Manager Barksdale: We object TO that.
on account of incOmpetency. And the OBJ
lection was sustained by the Chair.l
By Manager Barkskale: Why did you give
a receipt to Davis?
A. Because | had two receipts, one dupli-
cate in my pocket; met Governor Davis, |
and handed the receipt to him.
Q. How many men had you met that
before You met Davis?
A. Well. / cannot say; ! never counted |
them: probably one hundred.
O. Why did you not give it to all that |
one hundred, instead of to Davis?
4. | supposed it would reach Mr.. Packer |
sooner through Governor Davis, than any |
other man l met.
By Senator Pratt: What conversation |
took place between you and Governor Da- |
Wis, at the time you handed him the receipt? |
Manager Barksdale objected, saying that |
when prosecutor asks for conversation, |
we are entitled to all OF that cOnY erSation. |
The rule is that admissions are always |
against but his declarations are never COM |
petent in his favor.
The Chair proposed to submit the ques- |
ton to the Senate, and Manager Barksdale |
Chair preferred TO have the decision of the |
Senate.
The question was accordingly put to the |
Senate and it was order ed that the witness |
should answer the aforesaid question.
A. No particular conversation took place |
[ merely said: Good morning, Governor;
here, sir, is the Packer receipt.
By Senator Foote: Did the respond |
ent, Gov. Davis, ever inform you, or did you
hear him say, or any other person say in his |
in Of u hot
he had granted to Barrentine?
Manager White objected, as witnesses
could not make part Of declaration With |
out emitting them TO the whole of it.
The Chair submitted to the Senate wheth- |
er the question shOgd be GntertQined, and
it was the sense Of the Senate that the Ques- |
ton should not be asked,
By Senator FurlOng: Why did you apply |
one hundred dollars of funds which you
state belonged to a. G. Packer to liquidqte
a debt due by Lieutenant-GovernOr A. X. |
Davis to you?
A. Because thought that was the shortest
way to reilil t4lrse la yseIf fer one hundred |
dollars lOared to him that morning.
By Senator Johnston; When you loaned |
Davis the sum of one hundred dollars, what |
promise or security, II any, did Davis give |
YOU Is TO reDaYmentG
A. None. sir; he merely said l am out of
money will you loan it to me? / took it |
~
O. How and when did you expect to be
reimbursed for that loan?
Mr.. Morris objected, on the ground of i'm |
com potency, as Davis could not know what
was passing in the secret mind of any other
man; and Davis was not bound any more
by what man thinks than by what he says.
The Chair sustained the objection. A diVi-
sion was cIlled for, and the ruling of the
Chair was sustained by the following vo;p
YEAs-Messrs. Albright, Barry, Calicott,
o.
long, Graham, Gray, Mcneil, Mendenhall,
Morgan, Reynolds, Sims, Smith, Stewart,
Taylor, Terry, Thompson, futile, White
y.
NAYs-Messrs Catchings Chalmers, Crit
fin, FOote. Hooker, Johnston, McCaskill,
Oldham, Pratt-9.
BY Manager Barksdale: Did you not tell
NJ. l.. toward, to whom Lieutenant-Gov-
ernOr Davis was indebted, that he Davis
would have money soon? And TO what
money did you refer? And when did such
conversation occur?
Counsel Morris objected, because the res
pendent is not bound Ly that statement.
The leading question puts up an answer.
Manager Barksdale claimed that this was
no leading question. but brings the witness
up to the subject about which we wish him
to speak. The question is intended to elicit
what knowledge he had of Davis soon COM
ing into the possession of any money; and
if so, whether he had reference to the money
for which the order was obtained.
Manager Earksdale commented, at some
length, to show the difference between the
above questions and what are understood
by the courts to constitute leading ques-
tons.
Counsel Morris replied, and insisted upon
his objection being valid, and submitted the
question to the sense of the Senate; and
the objection of Counsel Morris was sus-
tanned.
Mr.. Spears, as co4nsei for the respondent.
arose to continue the cross-eXamination.
Senator Chalmers objected, as both the
examination and the eross-eXamination OF
the witness had closed, and he had been
turned over to answer the questions put by
the Senate