The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-02-07
rHr NEW ORLEANS oRAr rlfuRsDAY, FEBRUARY 1875
Don't a rra1 "neei'e or not IL was prior

~ 4@JVhAl,
Don't remember whether - 80. i ,,,u t,,.,or
10 my affldavits - nv. ~ YVES p1 aN
Aad L.. ce an,,',t with Shannon In Au-
non said he be M, d',s' ,,rs.s das - t,5s,he
taking the lasse batch of Testimony. and that
no had, under Tayls,res instructions, taken II
re . SUI me cp.se shannon and used to be all
me time uigetneI. Told Shannon the fraudu-
las sna a "a tho Pope receipts, after not
Had written agreement with Shannon. It
since.
tion of the claim for d two thirds share there
To the Court Neither Bernard nor myself
was a lawyer. We found the Bellooq, Noblom
% % claim, and bernard suggested that We
vices were the employing OF Corwine to nj
| tend to the case, working up the case, seeing
witnesses, etc. Peychaud knew and did not
disapprove the payment Of $4,000 to Shannon !;
| 80 also as to the vallaae and other payments.
To the Defense The first agreement was
drawn up by me. This was the first agrse-
| ment. ! agreed to take charge OF the claim
for two-thirds OF the amount recovered, and
pay all attorneys fees, etc.
1t Is not unusual for attorneys In fact-llot
| attorneys at law-to have charge of cases Of
| this kind.
My attorneys in the Elgee case we're Gen,
Butler, Caleb Gushing, Mr.. Grow and several
others.
Think. the insurance in the schooner case
| was paid Iii 1866 or 1866
To the Prosecution got $500 from the
| insurance company, and from tho treasury
$15,s55, In the schooner case; of this, oil but
betveen $4,000 and $1,000 was expended to se-
cure the collection Of the claim; the net pro-
ceedE OF the claim got. OF the two-thirds
share of the. Judgment In the Belloeq, No
blom Il Go. claim, only $29.237 60 ever came
| Into my hands.
TO the CourtIThe agreement In regard to
the extra $4,000 paid TO Taylor for Assistant
Attorney. General Johnson and Mrs. Dent,
| was made by Taylor. Conrad and myself.
pe I, was not party TO the agreement
leans, and knew nothing Of the arrangement.
Father Subileau was also party TO the agree
ment.
TO the Prosecution Shannon saw Barrett
In his fBarrett's) room twice. and In my house
two or three times. Shannon was the first to
tell mo that Barrett was q government officer.
Don't know what Shannon's opportunities
wore for learning Barretts moral character.
RECESS.
After recess the, examination of witnesses
Was resumed.
WIZ. FEssENDEN
recalled-Am o lawyer: practiced actively
from 1547 to 1860: was in the army during the
war; afterwards was o clerk In the Treasury
Department; the matters referred to me were
mainly legal points In caaes coming before
the department. Was In New Orleans from
July, 1868, TO July. 1870. Represented the gov
eminent before Che commissioner for taking
testimony In the Bellocq, Noblom II Go. case.
June 1870, Jules Noblom, the first witness,
WIS produced. examined by Mr.. Conrad, and
cross. examined by mo- Don't remember
whether had the petition In the case before
I'D to two points: |. Whether Bellocq, Mob
lom d Go. had any liens on the cottons; 3. As
to whether the advances were made before on
after the fall Of New Orleans.
Don't remember the testimony OF Jules
Noblom. He u. Nob1om) was unable 10 find
except IN two OF three eases-any balances
due Bellocq, Noblom Il Co., as against the
said eottons Think no other witness was OK
aIined
GRoss.ExAMTNED.
The examination took place before d. Ur-
ban, commissioner. The writing was done by
his clerk, Mr.. Devonshire. Mr.. Urban Is
eoyed 0f Bid s not see NJ Psycha v The
animation was held some time in May or
June, 1870.
Uo1. HOPKINS
recalled--Produced and identified the first
and second dispositions OF Theodore Vallad
and the first and second dispositions OF Il. +.
Poyret. Offered In evidence and read to the
jury Also receipts Of Pettitan q Go. attached to
the deposition Of Capt. Pope; submitted and
read to the jury one OF these receipts, in
dorsed to i. Pettitan Il Co. by Louis G. |
Meyer, and both Endorsed by them to Belloca,
Noblom IL Co.
MILLER DUNBAR
recalled-Am Pettitan's son-in-law; have
known him since 1860.
Shown receipt; his signature on tho re-
rpipt ia MT ptttitau'a aiunntt1ra r,r,r is ha
other that OF Louis G. Meyer; he cannot
write. There never was such firm as Il.
Pettitan IL Go.
CROSS EXAMINED.
Have known Pettitan's writing for fifteen
years; 1t has not changed la that time
A. BoUcHARD
son told me he had deposited
S4510 In the Germania National Bank, to the
credit Of r. r Shannon, Hetold me that he
ehaud except the S29,237 go, which were the |
net proceeds of my share of the two-thirds for |
which we agreed to push the claim Of Bel |
loco, Noblom II Go.
Vs. the succession Of L. r. Bernard ct ais, |
and read same to the jury.
Also that Of r. M. Corwine in tho same
case. Ruled out
Prosecution offered to read deposition of
Adolphe Bouchard In the same cause, as evil
dence offered by the defense.
The court held that it had not been definite
ly put in evidence by the defense. and that II |
now read 1t must be as evidence offered by the |
SO offered and read
At the conclusion of the reading of Bou- |
,hard's deposition the court after repeating
The warning to the jurors in regard to read
ing or conversing about the case, and remind
ing them that It was one of the most i'm
portant cases ever tried In that court, and one |
involving interests OF national moment as well |
rs local Importance, adjourned until this !
morning at II o'clock.
ARRIVED HERE.