Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1880-10-30
THE PHILIP TRIAL.
Continuation ofthe Examination Before

| Dut w uulll ullcT tlc ~ VI NONcIuDtI
THE PHILIP TRIAL.
Continuation ofthe Examination Before
Judge Davis-Several Witnesses For the
Prosecution Examined-The Defense
Anxious to Push the Case Through.
New YORK, October 29.-The eXami.
uation OF Kenward Philip, charged with
criminal libel upon Gen. Garfield, was
continued before Judge Davis in the
Supreme Court this morning. There
was large crowd Of spectators present.
The envelope in which the Morey let.
ter was contained was handed to Judge
Davis and, on motion of counsel, Mr..
Hart was declared purged OF contempt.
Assistant District Attorney Bell called
Albert 5. SOuthworth To the stand. He
testified that he was an expert in hand.
whiting, Of fifteen years experience.
He had compared the Photographic and
tire photo.ithographic copy Of the Mo.
rey letter with the Rockwell and Jewell
letters, and did not think they were in
the same handwriting. He had also
compared the Morey letter with the ex.
was obtained and found a sufficiency Of
characteristics TO enable him to form the
opinion that they were in the same
handwriting.
Cross. s.examined-Witness had come
from Boston on the telegraphic request
OF Marshall Jewell; he expected pay for
his services; he made the affidavit at
the request OF Messrs. Stoughton. Knox
and Davenport; he gave before them q
synopsis of what he would testify to-;
never saw the original Morey letter un.
ill this morning; did not know General
Garfield, and did not know for whom he
would vote.
The prosecution next called
VIM. Hagan. of Troy,
an expert in handwriting. The witness
had examined the Morcy letter and
Photographic and photo.lthographic
copies Of it, together with the exhibits
on which the warrants were obtained,
aud his opinion was that the person
who wrote the exhibits wrote the Morey
letter. The Morey letter was evidently
the writing Of person initiating an
others hand, Introducing, however,
strong characteristics OF his own. In
Exhibit A" in the signature OF Ken.
ward Philip, the Ok" is exactly similar
to the "k" in kept" in the Morey letter.
The witness found other similarities in
the letters. He had examined the
photo-lthographic copies of exhibit
No. | and ." and the original
thereof. and Rockwell and JEWELS
letters, and he declared that they were
not in the same handwriting.
Cross.examined by Mr.. Brooke-Re-
ccived telegram from Gov. Jewell, yes
terday, to come here, and expected to
be paid. do not know Gen. Garfield,
and was not interested in him any furth.
er than to give him his vote. The wit.
ness was then shown by Staughton,
counsel for the prosecution, the enve-
lope produced this morning, and was
asked il there had been an erasure on
the stamp, and he answered in the az
firmative. Continuing he said, there is
an erasure on the stamp in the date OF
the month: can't say what the original
date was; the indications are that the
date and month have been erased by
rubbing on the back OF the envelopes.
The stamp date there bears indications
of an erasure. The date and month can
not be deciphcred. There are three
stamps on the envelope in which no
seemingly being erased.
Mr.. Southworth wss then Recalled
bv Mr.. Stoughton. He was handed the
Morev envelope, and alter examining il
testified that the address on the envel-
ope is not in the handwriting OF the per-
son who wrote the Rockwell and Jewell
letters, but closely resembles the writing
OF the person VINO wrote the exhibit
marked "A TO X" on which the warrant
OF arrest was granted.
Alien NJ. Leet. a Newspaper Reporter
was examined by the prosecution. He
was familiar with Philips handwriting.
The exhibits "A to h" were handed
witness He was OF the opinion that
they were in Philips handwriting; had
seen the photo-litaograph copy OF the
Morey letter, and believed it TO be in
Philips handwriting; thought so when
he first saw the copy; Philips always
had habit OF spelling such words as
companies and similar words with "ys'
instead OF "ies." In the Morey letter
this mistake is male.
At this stage OF the cssa Mr.. Bell said
he would ike an adjournment, as he had
other witnesses 10 examine who were
not present. He expected, he said,
witness from Lynn. Mass, who had not
arrived, and that Mr.. Payne, his other
expert witness, was lying sick and un.
able 10 attend.
The Defense Objects.
This was objected to by Mr. Brooke.
and General Pryor, also for the defence,
said he thought it was due to his side
TO allow aim TO produce proof OF the
genuineness OF the letter.
After al argument by the counsel,
Judge Davis said:
~ feel it my duty to sit as examining
magistrate, and although il is not usual
for justice in supreme court to 80
use his authority, it is not without pre-
cedent. Chief Justice Mansfield, in q
case similar to this, so sat and commit
ted the defendant after theevidence was
admitted. II this letter was in fact
written by Garfield as an expression OF
the views he entertained on the sub
iect OF the letter, it was not only unwor-
thy OF MIN, but should condemn him.
There is no possible doubt, / think,
in the minds OF thinking people in this
country that the idea with which this
lo<tar cloooc that fpoafv NTH n Or01f