The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1876-02-15
THE BABCOCK TRIAL.

ST. LOUIS, February 14.-Judge Por-
ter, in concluding his argument against
the admission of the kilograms in the
Babcock trial, occupied nearly all the
morning session to-day. His conclusions
were that they were writings, and
whether proven to be what they purport-
ed TO be in origin and destination, it wai
still q question of law whether they
could be admitted as evidence. He did
not admit, however that this proof and
Identification had been shown as to the
great majority of these kilograms. There
were produced no answers at all.
Such were hearsay letters, merely relating &
facts and making inquiries which did not
convey the slightest hint tof conspiracy,
but none of these, whatever might be
shown of them, or whatever construction
put upon them, we're admissible as testi-
mony until by intrinsic evidence it had
been established that General Babcock
had knowledge of the existence of con-
spiracy, This must first be proven and
it had not been proven.
After Judge Porter concluded Thomas
j. Walsh, brother-in-law of General Nc
Donald. Chief Clerk in his Office when
Supervisor, was called and identified
several letters and dispatches written by
him at the dictation of Mcdonald, and
also identified the signatures of himself
and Joyce affixed to the receipts for tele-
grams to Mcdonald, Joyce and others.
On the opening of the afternoon session
Judge Dillon read
Decision OF the Court.
touching the admissibility Of dispatches
as follows: Respecting the objection
against the admissibllitv as evi.
dence of certain dispatches, the Judges
have united in the conclusion
as respects all except two dispatches re-
spectivcly dated the "3d" and 18th" Of
December. We reserve the questions
arising upon those dispatches, which are
some hat novel and peculiar, for further
consideration. All the others are offered
with certain objections, which we Will
proceed to state and notice and describe.
We are of the opinion that the dis
patches, based on the ground that they
are not relevant or material, is not well
taken. The jury is the constituted tri-
bunal to determine the controverted ques-
tions of the facts under appropriate advice
from the Court to assist them in the dis
charge of this duty. If the evidence
offered tends in any degree to establish
the existence of any material fact, 1t
can't be objected TO as irrelevant, but
must be received and submitted to the
consideration of the jury in connection
with all the facts and circumstances OF
the case. 10 reject the dispatches offer
ed, on the ground they were irrelevant
and immetarial would be decision by
the Court. Such dispatches had nothing
to do with the alleged conspiracy and
he would take that question which Is
question of fact from the jury, whose
exclusive province it Is to
decide questions of fact. We don't deem
it e1pedient or proper to remark on the
several dispatches or to say anything In
the presence of the jury as the views of
the court on the force and the elect OF
them. 1t is not to be inferred that in
admitting the dispatches the court
holds that they do or not connect the de-
sadant with the alleged conspiracy. AS
to the objection that some Of the dis
patches addressed to the defendant were
unanswered, we are of the opinion that
under the circumstances of the case, this
alone does not constitute sufilc-
lent ground to exclude them.
Such dispatches are to be viewed in con-
nection with all the circumstances OF the
case, including the nature of the dis
patches, as calling for an answer or
otherwise, and the situation and relations
of the parties, and the effect to be given
to the circumstance that no answers
were returned. If the dispatches were
received by the defendant, it is to be de-
termined by the jury upon the whole evil
dence under the rules of law TO be given
to the Jury bearing on the subject AS
to the dispatches between Mcdonald
and Joyce, confessed consplrators,
such dispatches are admissible as
statements or acts of conspirators among
themselves, but as TO the defendant they
90 for naught, unless he is shown by other
evidence to be connected with the con-
spirscy charged in the indictment.
Manner OF Handling Dispatches.
Kennedy Sertf, manager of the ATTAIN
tic AMI Pacific telegraph office at Wash
ington, was called and explained the
manner of handling dispatches in that
office. One of the dispatches, and to
which the defense made strenuous obiec-
tions, the one dated December 8, 1874,
and asserted to have been been sent
by General Bsbcock to Joyce,
could not be found, the package of tele-
grams of that day having been lost, and
only a copy was produced. This dispatch
is alleged to have been an answer to one
sent by Joyce from st. Louis to Babcock,
and was traced into the hands of George
Joyce, doorkeeper at the White House,
but Jovces signature had not been iden-
tilted by the prosecution, and therefore
Its delivery was inferential.
The Court decided that the record and
register of the telegraph office did not
remove the difficulty in this case. These
dispatches are the ones referred TO IN
Judge Dillon's decision gwen above, and
about which he reserved his opinion.
&. &. Snitiin,
One of the Presidents Private secre-
was called but could not identify Geo.
Joyces writing.
w. +. Sperry and Messrs. Lennox and
Cunningham, clerks at the Pla.ters House,
this city, testified to having received and
receipted for several dispatches to Nc
Donald and Joyce in 1874, mostly in De-
cember. among them being one dated
December 5th, which is supposed to be
the one asserted t. have been sent by
Bsbcock to Mcdonald sndto which such
objection has been made.
f. B. Brown, Manager Of the Western
Union Telegraph office of this city, then
explained the manner in which the
records of his Office are kept, and how the
kilograms are handled both for transmls'
sion and delivery.
The Telegrams Admitted.
Col. Dyer then read the following tele-
grams, which were admitted uuder the
Codrt's decision, at the opening OF the