The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-12-06
LILLONA'S STRANGE STORY.
ANO rIfER WITNESS CONFRONTED WITH
MS OWN HINDURITIYG.
Me-. Morgan Morxnns Aan,ittInH TINT he I, Ia
teres,ed In Oac-Haf the suit More Proof
81 the value 81 Mules and Other Thinss

Az the opening, ycStcrdAy, W thC court IN
he killonn plantation lawsuit Con. Buicr, not
satisfied with his demand for tii6.27s CT from
Gen sheridan for making the order on which
the plantation WIS s"iz,l. asked leave to almond
The complaint ~ ~ to ncluic damages for the
assault Oh Mr.. Whalcu AMI his family. mud also
for the loss oil property not already nanol in
The complaint. Judge Wallace decided That the
complaint could bO amended ~ tu the prC u"r'y
but not IA to the assault because tho latter
would Oh 1nge tho form OF tho n ton. In reply
b. the objection suglycs,cdhy Mr. llcrrick. judge
Wallace said that II. on tho part " Ger. Shor-
dan. ;hc plea of tlio statute Of limitations should
b. intcrposod. it would AMY 10 tho limo the
suit wa. begun. and moi t. the time when the
complain, was amended
MIR Morgan Mor!nn-. lr then continued his
testimony mainly rs to the value of tho proper
ty alleged to be On the killcna plantation at tho
tme Oi the alleged seizure under Con. Snort
dams order.
on cross.cSaminatirn MIR. Bcckwi,h asked
series " questions designed to show the pccu.
MARY interest ~ the witness IN the suit against
Gen. Sheridan. Mr.. Morgans admitted that he
had half Interest in thc suit acquired about
two years AMI n half ago by purchasing half OF
Mr.. Nhalrn's interest. lie said hc had paid
about 81 500 for expenses % the suit. aud had
agreed to pny half of all tho expenses Some
thing was sail about counacl fees and MIR
Bockwith said. " don't ask YOU about what you
paid your counsel you. have not paid thcm
on. don't disturb my fees" said Gen. But
Mr. Mnrgnns testified further that he had not
paid money TO procure Witnesses to swear in
tho case On this point he said; No. sir, !
amt soft enough go do that; know that kind
OF thing has got to come out. | knew that the
witness Johnston. had IN interest OF f2juuu In
this cqsr but II not know i unit after be had
made his deposition. He II to be- paid. n at all.
out Of ;he procecds ofthc whole case"
-" Dil YOU not liyc IN 1880 on a plantation In
Mississippi called the Hard Bargain plania
"Yes. that was the namc Of It, went on the
KillOna plantation In November. tho latter part.
have estimnted."
Mr. Beckwith produced = hill Of sale Of the
Killona plantation dated Doc 20 1866 which
tho witness acknowledged that he had made
with Whaon to Mark llnyt The prices of the
various articles we're ridicuiously low in all
cases as compared with tho prices that the wit.
ness had sworn % and the othor witnesses had
eorroborated. when Mr.. Beckwlth and Mr..
Noodiord had finished reading. Gen. Butler.
who had been watching II narrowly. seized the
document and shouted:
WHY don't you read II all -
L have road II ALL" said Mr. Woodiord.
here-read all Of that and he ratified the "a
per neryously ns he patted an entire page with
Why. nv dear General that ia exactly what
we have been residing" said Gen. Woodford.
Z" Lam sorry you lid not hear IT,"
Then Chen. Butler sa, down. and the witness
proceeded TO explain how it was that the bill Of
sale named such low prices in comparison with
the prices sought TO be recovered from Gen.
Sheridan MS damages,
protect myself aud Mr.. Whalen. Il sells TO Mr..
Hoyt: Wegot into trouble with firm OF mer-
sale was only blnd-a cover. They suod us.
and their claim was not Just or honorable. To
and deirandine us his arransement y" was SEN en-,
tered into with Mark Hoyt. and II was agreed
that Hoyt was 20 own one-,hirl. Whalen one
third. and myself one-third. had no moro
nouonof surrcndering that plantation than
have Of cutting my head of.
DID You confess the judgments that were
received as nart OF the purchase money from
-. I" Yes. sir. But there was no Intention to sell
that plantation 10 Mark Hoyt. No living man
IT. his senses would sell that property at that
price"
Judge WALLACE Do you mean 10 say that these
prices were so inadequate that anybody would
Certainly" replied the witness Only as
sents for suade. and 80 on"
Gen. Butler insisted. and the Court held. that
al this evidence about the bill OF sale waA only
admitted on tn. question 81 the value Of the
property AMI could not DO used 20 show the
ownership OF the property by Mark Hoyt Gen.
Butler added subsequently. sufficient 10 the
day Is the law thereof"
=" You mean the evil thereof" said Mr. Her.
Oh. evil and law mean the same thing
IN this case ans wercd Gen. Butler.
Is n not true That execution WIS issued pro
dicatei upon ono Of these oniessed judgments.
and that the property was seized aud taken
Out 81 the po~sy sslun ~ You md NhHlCn p
Yes, sir. and delivered up again"
Mas 4 not agreed that you should sell this
4, bind YES, It was sold in one sense
but II WAS never given up.
Then Mr.. Beckwith produced m afildayit
made by the witness, in which he AwOrc that the
sale IN question was y real sale oi the killona
pinntaliOu 10 Mark Hoyt and not spurious
sale, In, explanation OF that affidavit tho wit
~ dld that to protect myself l do not think
was doing wrong to protocol myself and pre-
nu unjust claim against me. do not think | am
detranding You by protecting myself ia that
MIR. Beckwith explained that the affidavit
sworn to by the witness was on proceeding
for contempt in which II was alleged that tho
sale of the killOna plantation WAS simulated.
and this witness had sworn that it was not
Ihe next point Of assault nad9on The witness
not actually 10 possession OF The Killona plan
Latlon. Mr.. Beckwith asked. Is it not true
that james II. Slater had absolute control Of the
personal properly Of that plantation. and tho
sugar grown on il. rs against you and NhalenF'
:, No sir not g. TIC best OF my recollection p
Was not J. II. Slater in actual possession
from February 1865. 10 tho 9Th OF August
1867 p This 10 show by ono Of Nhalen wit
nessee that Whalcn was not the owner Of the
cant answer that question in any way OK.
oept as | undsrstAnd II" answered Morgans.
OF me. You can't put any words IN nay mouth"
Judge Wallace II 10 pres umed that a witness
lieye anything he saws.
We'll then. must answer No. sir" Mean
ing that j H. Slater was not in possession Of
the plantAtion.l
Mi. Woodord then road long AFFIDAVIT
made by the witness in January. 1873 In
which he spoke Of selling his interest 10
Marx HOyt. and also spoke of James ii
Slater as experimenting work. and ms
having control oi the plantation The witness
was then asked how Ia came 10 make such an
affidavit II Nhhlen WAS the owner The eX-
planatOn he gave was. that he signed many
papers at the request Of Mr. Iloyt without
knowing what was In them. Mr., Beckwith
asked him again whether no still would say
tat >. ~. slater was not in possession from
1850 70 August 1861
Mr.. Morgans gotR little nettlcd at this and re-
fused - answer, SAYING that he had already an
Bwered. Judge Wallace however,. insisted on
another answer, AMI AT length the witness said
II The Judge says | must answer. will do
Mr. BrokWith then went into an exhaustive
examination 81 the witnesses knowledge Of the
uul ON the plantation. and Mr.. MOTRans told
now he had fed them. worked them. looked
aitor thcln, ana told the difference between the
mu % INC sugar mules and the cotton
mules Judge Wallace at length said they had
enough testimony about the mules and they
would never got through II they went through
mo whole 800 articles in the list.
Your Honor knows that the mule is An OBJ
Nlnate animal suggested Gen Builder.
MIR. BeckWith persisted however in cato