Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1876-02-16
Progress Of the Trial Of President
Grants Private Secretary for De-
frauding the Revenue.
The Defense Fighting Hard for Life,
Liberty, and the Pursuit Of Happi-
ness, with ? Slim Chance.

| the dispatch of Joyce to BabcocR, De-
| cenber 80, and toe one from Bsboock to
joyce, December 5, 1874, which have not
| vet been admitted. The court also gave
notice to counsel that they would not
| pass on the admissability of the Avery
| kilograms until the defense had an OPP
| portunity to present evidence that
| AveIv name was known so the grand
| iurv and was not included in the indict-
nent naming the conspiracy. One OBJ
| lection TO the Avery teIegrams-that 1t
| was shown that Avery was in the con-
| spirscy-was overIuled, as the kilograms
| themselves tended to show that.
Alfred Bevis, the distiller, was put up
on the stand and testified that Joyce
showed him the "Sylph" dispatch frJm
| Babcock in December, 1874, and that MS
uudt rstanding from 1t was that the rev.
| enue agents were not coming, and on
| the strength Of the information prepar&-
| tons were made 10 run " crooked"
| When joyce showed the witness this
dispatch he told him everything was all
| ri ight and to go ahead.
II witness continued: Joyce showed
me- a letter at his Cffice about three or
f,Ur days after l saw the dispatch; l
asked him for il and he gave it to me; l
wanted to satisfy my partner that 1t was
all right: got it in the morning and re-
turned it in the afternoon. The defense
objected to witness stating what was IN
the letter, or how it was addressed, or
sven the pOstmaTk. The court Iuled
that the letter itself was primary evil
dence, and secondary evidence could
not be admitted until it could be proven
that the letter could not be produced.
Mr., BsVis was asked the effect OF the
4 Nh Anh
but was oyerruled. He said the letter
satisfied him that 1t was ali right, and
thew would not be disturbed in making
illicit whisky.
E.B. Frazer, business partner of the
previous witness, was called and stated
that Mr., Bevis showed him the letter
mentioned in his [Bevis's] testimony,
10 December, 1874, and that the effect
of il was that their house recommended
making Illicit whisky. On cross-ex-
animation of this witness he stated that
he was pretty well acquainted with
Rosge, the revenue agent to whom ring
money had been paid, but would not
tel, i ist when he began to serve the
riur' nor how he was seduced into its
seryiae, Witness received various let
ters and telegrams from Hoage, some OF
them signed ''Bixbyi" recollected going
TO Cincinnati to meet him on one occa-
sion. in response to a telegram; HOge
kept the ring pretty well advised OF the
movements OF the revenue agents, and
Was generally considered IS working
conscientiously in the cause in which he
had been retain ed. Witness was shown
eleven letters, the writing on which ne
identified as that OF Hoage, but he never
saw or heard OF the letters before.
s., NJ. BartOr, agent or manager OF
Bingham Bros. distillery here, then took
the stand, and testified to having con-
fributed in April, 1SI5s- two thous-
and five hundred dollars TO
ind of five thousand dollars, which
was to go to Joyce; he had con-
versation with Joyce regarding the
purpose to which that money was put.
THE introduction of this evidence be-
ing objected to by the council for the de-
fense. after an argument Of some length
the court ruled it out, and the examine
ton was continued.
J. J. Brooks, formerly revenue agent
but now assistant chief Of the secret
service division of the treasury depart
ment, testified and corrOboratej Com
missioner Douglass's account of his et-
forts to uuearth the frauds here in 1874,
giving the same dates OF consultations,
interviews letters, tele grams, visits to
Washington, Philadelphia, ETC., by him.
self aud Hoage, as were given by MI.
Douglass, He also described his visit to
New Orleans and detection OF the frauds
there in April, 1874, and subsequently
his detection Of the frauds by BeVls q
Frazer of this city. On cross-exemlna-
tion he said he had some suspicious OF
Hoage's integrity by reason OF reports
which came to him while at New Or-
leans; HOage had failed to meet him at
the appointed time, and did not reacn
New Orleans until two days after
he witnessl had seized the dlstl-
Iar;es there were evidences at
New Orleans that tidings OF their
visit had been received Iu advance;
again, when he and Hosge were in st.
Louis examining Bevis d Frazer's
affairs, Hoage did some things which he
1.-THE vitness7 thought reprehensible; and
ne associated with FitZrOy too much,
and went around with distillers; he
did not know, however, that Hoage was
| furnishing information to distillers here
| at that time, nor did he know that FItZ-
roy or others were engaged in con-
| spiracy to defIaud the government Wit
| ness knew the handwriting OF doage,
| and had seen MIN write.
On redirect examination Colonel
| Over ash ed the WitEe5s by what means
| he thought the distiliers of New orleans
obtained advice of his raid upon themJ
| and the defense objected. The question
was not pressed, but the witness said, In
| answer TO other questions, that several
persons at Washington other than Com
missioner Douglass knew that he and
| Hoage were going there. Colonel Dyer
| then offered some kilograms IN eypher,
which the defense claimed were conn.
Dental dispatches between the counsel
and his client. After examining them,
| tine court ruled them out. They sfe tele-
grams sent from here by MIR. LUCKY,
fhe Presidents secretary, to General
| Babeock, during the M'Ree tTlaI, ana
are understood to refer almost wholly 10
business matters between Judge hrum
and General Babcock as his Client Col
onel Dyer then offered what are known
as the Avery dispatches in evidence,
and they were admitted.
In regard to the dispatch signed
| "Msck,T the court said to the jury
HThere is no evidence before you as 70
who sent H., or In whose handwriting
1t is." ~
Colonel Dyer then said: ''If the court
please. in reference to the dispatches
that your honor holds which have not
Eesp admitted In evidence, dated De-
cember 8 and 5, 1874, the government
"a not prepared nov with testimony tc
prove the handwriting Uf the man who
received them and receipted for them II
Washington, but will tomorrow, or GER
tainly by the next day; and the gentle
men on the other side kindly consent
that the witness, when he arrives, may
be introduced during the hearing OF thel
side of the cause. think, with the ex
animation of that witness, the govern
ment will rest its case"
With the understanding that the gen
tlemen will allow al evidence necessary
to establish the receipt for those two dis
patches to be introduced hereafter, tn
court then adjourned to give Genera
Williams, who will open the case for tn
defense tomorrow, time to look over tn
evidence and prepare his speech.
The pope having granted 8 dispense
ton for the marriage Of the daughter
tbS sculDtOT Story, q Protestant, VIII