, 1876-05-13

MILWAUKEE, May 12.-Lcopold Wirth was re-
called, and testified that he did not remember
the conversation ut the interview in Mr.. Muir
phys office, or amy part Of it. On every point
on which he was questioned, witness had no
recollection. Same IN cross-exainination.
FRED GnlMM's EXAMINATION
was resumed. He testified that he saw With
in A1r. A1urphy's ofiice Feb. q last. Wirth was
asked what there was in this charge, and un-
swcred that, according to his recollection, there
WIS no conspiracy to steal papers or books or
destroy them He remembered it because he
took notes, and wrote d communication on the
subject to the Stats Zeitung. Wirth also said,
speaking OF Jonas, that he Qonas) WIS as inno-
cent rs d child.
ELIAS sIIIPs1AN
was recalled, and testified as to the same con-
versation in detail, confirming the statement
1nade by tile previous witness. III addition, lie
said hc did not know where Crosby WAS at the
moment Of speaking, but thought he had not
ubsconlel, and that witness could find him it
he tried. Gould not give information that
would lead to the discovery Of his whereabouts.
LOUIS NJ. COHEN, or DETROIT,
was the next witness. Hc testified that he was
ut the Tivoli, III Chicago, ut the Interview that
Louis Kinds.sopf referred to in his evidence, and
heard the conversation thcrcat- Jonas asked
him to do SO, before the meeting took
DI1tc. 1 11t DsELf Lu1kEu CONTINUOUSLY 10F
nhdut twenty minutes on the subject of
This consnjrutv. Kintiskonf in about the middle
Of the conversation, asked, s'Who is TINT man!''
h How Should knowP; Tic witness went to
the bar but cane back and took chair in diff
fercut niacc. where be was able to hear still bct-
ter. Heard Louis say to Goldberg that Mchin-
ncy had sent him Iuuis) to sec him fGoldberg),
u1l1 then lc added in substance that Mckinney
had told him it was not him or Crosby nor
f(,n1dherr1 would come IN and tcs-
tify against Hcdrick, the case against
Dismissed. M Go|lberg sn;d he knew nothing
against Hed5ick. Rindskopf told him
TuAr WOULD MAKE 10 DIFFERENCE,
h1t tt, come IN and swear to what he told him,
and he would be all right. Goldberg said that
,roull be perjury. Louis said that wouldn't
make .ny difference: that he {Lo,,is} had com
Iuitted perjury over and oyer ugain, and that
It wns nothing: and he added: * What is
Jonas or Hedzick to you!" Witness
Wadsworth, and Jake Rehm they were
after: didn't hear him say anything
about Furwel1 or Logan. Rindskopf said to
Goldberg: "You must protect yourself; you
have u famly to take care OF, and you are poor "
He asked where Crosby was, and said he wanted
him. Goldberg said, Il Louis would produce a
Sts5 @ e wond nd ot bag him 1oo
milwaukee,. Louis said he thought
lie COULDN'T DO THAT,
but Goldberg must find Crosby and tele-
1,ranh to him (Rindskopf). Witness tes-
fittI ut considerable length on these
points, most of the evidence being
mere repctitIou, and to the effect that Farwel
md Hehm were to be reached through Gold
hrro and Mckinney knew Goldberg could not
tcsf7i,: tr1,thfujIy against anv of these parties
Int Tint made no difference, and if he did tes-
tifr # would he ali rirht. aud be would not be
tr;rtl
In cross-examinatfon by Mr., Mckinney, the
witness rave n history Of Ills lie. and said be
wnrEfd i9 this case out of friendship for Jonas
Mads notes If the conycrsation above reported.
Hare thrra +oo1; njorr
r,n1 r,:r rxr1os1or>
m arcount Of Mckinney askirr defendant II
he ,ras n lew. framiue his question fu such q
way rs to rouse the Indignation Of counsel for
thr defense.
Mr, Nurphcy denounced the line Of cross -ex-
animation Is BETTY, un1nanly, and lishonorable.
The Court said he was not satisfied vet wllctf-
or tho question denounced was material or not.
Mr. Nurphey said he could not satisfy the
Court unless lle was permitted to proceed if he
could not be heard, OF course he would sit down.
1tr, Mckinney MAIDS an explanation Of the
object Of bis question.
Col, Goodwin would not object to the ques-
ton il it had been put with an honest purpose,
but it was put in . covert way for IN improper
purpose, aud was
AN INSULT TO COURT or JUSTICE.
The Court here impressiyely said the counsel