The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-02-05

Wa Was l' hD on the reeei ed ID Washlngton
Wa knaw the cotton did not belong to Bsllpcu,
\ Ed nosabs by the planters and make over the
iom n 90. MI Peyehaad mentioned that some ne
Enlaims were being prosecuted by panters. nat
we relied on tne receipts as before fore toll lave lave
known Mr.; shannon since 1883; haxa peen
1a1a me VIA shnpnoa and tsa re-
uuently about the case. had letter from Geo;
Taylor, que OF the defendants nnh attorney 81
ton to consulting with shannon relative 70 the
claim. Letter. produced and idnntifssd y as In
Tayqrdf b gaa is T ths NJ shan
who il one of the defendants in this ease, He
vas then United States Commissioner. and the
Claims was taken before him shannon Let
ters submitted and read TO jury. Had no con
versation with Shannon at the time OF receiving
the letter. but had had many conversations
u.s. M7t before ! " vent TO- Washlnston We eonsd
Erred the reeep ae bsore anv other
commissioner. and examined In the regular
manner, and theIr testimony was used y Ia the
es s we're Interested III the claim. In 1872 made
an arrangement with shannon 9 take the tes FL
mony; we were to pay him $4,000 TO- .aks s the
ehsud Knew knew Of end agreed to thls. shan =
n2a saia ~ In III cases in which Taylor wis
Interested; he never said he would 50 tBke the
testimony % to make out the case q 4 9 ~
Asked whether he had interviews with Taylor
and Loye IN Wa We ahae,Inn a,,atained
Lowell is lawyer In Washington Is ono OF
the was engeE n sas e to aa ana T sd
aa da aeseye nsy TO and aid receive
| aid 600 lowell was engaged with Taylor in, the
infringement G. Of tho c,se 10 the Court ot Claims
| ma havinr bean written by Lowell to him wit
nessj. Submitted aud read to the Jury. 49,, ,,u
Ny share Of the Judgement lEa, was =, s ", a ~
explained the difficulty, we had In regard to
vasds and to fsy Df tTo oa
til IN that Vaade, advised me not 20 take .l ~ 9
testimony Of the planters as some OF them haa
h he1 bTd be rscsps and
| hold on to them and proceed upon them. Ii be
came. necessary, under the non intercourse az.
made prior to the fall Of New, Orleans. spoke
10 Lowell about, Che Castillo, claim: he said he
the claim but BE- hHd the Ieeep a IN
shs 12eo,s' T#asshlnston LAWYER Gould de-,
do not fn2 INV Of threat AGAINST gains
~ or teesstisylng in this case. Poyre q testimony
was wa taken in February or, March, 1879: the date
sat he sabom p ee g. Wss ehaprsd P wa
| The Tinted States Supreme. Court with Lowell
when the decision vas rendered In the case a 81 81
Lowell after hearing the decision we are gone
up' meaning that our case was lost. We then
to The GH q 10 oam a h dates ia e
t simony as to the time OF tho transfers to Bel
ioed, Noblom 4 Go, I was determined to change
gated to- arrange the matter A few days after
Taylor made the motion to re- AXE the Testimony y
and it was retaken bsfore Shannon. Inc dill
Guilty we unprecedented :, was the t is.s.
tf etn y the Sea' Court A' Lowell ssid That hs
could BY paying Assistant Attorney ,e General
TAYLOR and Lowell agreed to pay che same to
Johnson, but wanted Peyehaua Bernard and
%ys It e ba suR spn IF TaySr he f said G
few days after the payment 70 Peychaud hy the
government II OF bsa dfnn
money and had paid Johnson. ..ua
This statement was ruled out as not being
evidence being the uterance OF accused parties
thing, an accomplished fact. and finally ended
September 10 1874, being the date g. Whieh The
oophIt rn,ea at .ae asbea enve to argue the
matter of this ruling, y hieh was allowed. and 9
recess was taken until 9el , when the eour'
| The court resumed Its sitting Mt 2 o'clock: and
argument was heard "a to the admssibility o.
last Of tn the witness ta an
withdrew the objection and the witness EBou-
chardl resumed: -
NAMED there until August, 1919; bad man,
interviews with Lowell and Taylor Love to,,t
TINT Pope had been in washington ana h h9lt
lPopel $1,000 for the receipts he Ioyelll sac
he had nothing to do with that but Il the r 81
Eove e ssd he had no that Noon
aud Pope had manufactured tho receipts.
suggested the employment OF Mr.. Dent hecaus,
General Dent died before the claim was col
lected. paid his widow $500: the others refused
to pay her nnytbng. DON'T k M Shat t 9n1Re
great interest ia preventing the taking OF at
appeal. Returned to this city about August !
SW 81 veh the
was used d to prevent an appeal Mr. PeyehauG
gave me reason to believe that he considered
August t i. 1873. aud met Nj shannon, and v
talked about the case of Belloca, Nobl9m @ Go
He referred to P2yrets testimony a.d h 4 IN
to Shannon the danger which threatened us
that there was moth ing in the case tina, the re.
had s9 He eaa he had
the testimony of Poyret, and had fixed 1t to sui
the case. according to Taylor's, instructions
Identified proiet Of the distribution OF the pro
ceeds of the Judgment and said the proceeds.
SO far as distributed In washington were al d,
vided according to the projet. which was draw
UP by Lowell and submitted to the parties IN
! PROFIT submitted and read to the jury.
The item of $4,000 included $4,000 to Johnson
. Assistant Attorney General. $500 to Capt Pop
and $500 for miscellaneous expenses, to wit
the taking Of testimony in Chicago. Shannon
has told me that he received $45to on account o
his services in the case.
Asked: While You were In Washington, Ia !, 1s74
was there any difficulty between you and lay
lor as to the payment to you OF your share Q
The proceeds?
The court directed this question to be re
! served until Tuesday morning.
yallade's arst deposition and before his secont
deposition, and then signed it.. In the earl
part of 1873 told Mr.. Peychaud that Lowell an
Taylor had told me the receipts were manufnc
tured. and what Capt. Pope demanded Tor hi
| share in the transaction.
VI W. H. MORGAN.
J Have examined the testimony taken before MI
Sh annon. There were three commissions II
the case. One set Of evidence was taken befor
II. H. Shannon at several dates (dates men
toned and flied July 1s, 1874 The second Sc
was taken before shannon and filed Decembe
1s. 1874 I found the papers In my hands IN pos
| session of Col. Hopkins, and he told me tina
they were the records of evidence taken befor