The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-12-07
MORGAN M0RGANS MEMORY.
KTLLONI PLINTITIUN's DINER NOW 1
MiTTER on SOifr DOUBE


Lceni Complication ~ Gen. shcridnu's law
suit The Fnmou, Order : dmittcd In iti-
dcncc-A Foreshndo,ring of the nercucc.
Whom Nh Morgan Mwruus resumed the
stand .n the United States Circuit Court stcr-
day VA ,hc Kiloun lan,oton coso. the tArong VI
auditors WAS greater than at any previous
period of tine tuit a-aine, Gen. sheridan for
tllf21s. Mr. Ho.hWIth continued Dis CROSSE
examination. mauly go show thar SIR. Whacn
wr4 not The owner. by uuiun-. in evidence ihc
written agreement ly which Mr.. Morans
agreed with Jamca 4. Whalon, Use umiutn. 10
pay half the cost OF the present suit and To
r''"ivo nail tic proceeds in rasr any verdict
Should Ice given ng.in-t Gen. sheridan for
cHusin the so EURO OF llonn plantation
Mr. Bcrkw.h asked. " Was your partnership
with Whnl'n an ordinary or a commercial
uartnorshipW
That isa distinction hctwoon partnerships
That am not acquq.ntcd with Gen Builder
Mr. Morgans said. Tho partnership WIS for
III" purpose ~ conducting the business of
planting. ccton. sugar. aud corn. We never
I.one star ihc Ezra Davis the Ouitmnn aud
the killuna plantations. Tho mules from Mr..
Iioyt- Hard Blr-ain Plantation did not como
On uuiu, after the seizure under Cen. Shcri-
dun's ORDER"
Is il NOT true that in the year 1866 the Kill
in rosscss ION ~ James 4. Sioior hy virtue of an
agreement between YOU and.Whalpnf
NJ. sir; not as understand it,
pa YOU not make nm agreement with refer
cnce To this plantation In the mama of james
Cgnronf, lAn0thcr alleged owncrI
49, Us; took % upon myself 90 act Tor him.
We got lease ait 'rward obtained nn cNton-
sion ~ the leasc. an that lease was cam 'DlaI.'
Mr. Bcckwh proposed 10 show the witness
tn lease to refresh bus memory.
You nightas W n refresh his mind by put.
ting in his hand the book Of the Pcntateueh.'
You became tenants OF tho Rillona plania.
ton alter THIS lCu~c wis cancelled "
No. ~iri we never gave up the place tho
Thcq. after argument tho following question
hy James \. Whalcn oi Kulonn plantation dur.
ing the entire Year 1866, and up to the tiine Of
"a" execution of this order on AUG. 1867 lhe
date. Of the seizure 10y Shcridan's ordcrl was
limited 90 inhahtns tho house ON the planta-
ton, and went no iurthcr:'
" l. il not true that during the year 1896 and
mp To- Aug. =. 1867. j. H. Slater WINS I'm full pos
session of kliluuu plantation except $50 far as
dwelling house,
y" No. sir. Slater was not on the plantation
thal DAY. 50 lar a. J saw. l did not Sec him
Mr. BockwIth wished to show by this witness
that although ne WIS cumming damages Tor the
seizure under Gen. Shcridau's order he was
himself ~ possession for some time rs the
I agent Of Mark Hoyt lie was claiming dam
Gen. Butler denied thnt tho matter WINS of any
consequence, The witness had q right to take
employment. and in no legal. moral or religious
sens" could that fact be- used to the discredt Of
tho witness.
The witness repeated his assertion that Slater
urf so fur ~ bee know
GA the redirect examination Con. Butler
brought out thr explanation that the hlll Of sHle
| of the plantation To- Mark Hoyt WAS a Blind. Do
ana not a real sale. ny only a method Of pro-
ieglne him and NJ, Mhal..n from suii- hy al
ncr ~ Wuiking the plantation. Gen. Butler