New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-11-06
THE PHILIP FORGERY CASE.
CONTINUING THE INVESTIGATION.

| CROss-Ex AMINATIoN or AN EXPERT IN HAND" XII
| ING-AN ADJOURNMENT ASKED BY THE Dig
rr~Cr-wIrNEssRs IN REDUrTAL-JAMEs NC
DERMoTTs REPUTATION.
In the Philip inquiry yesterday morning tho cross
examination OF David VI. Carvaho. witness intro
duced by the defence as an export in handwriting
and photography, was resumed. Mr. Bliss de-
voted considerable time to ascertamng from the
witness what he considered the identical character
Istics in the Morey and the Jewell letters. Mr..
Carvalho testified as follows:
The stones I'm the Jewell and Morcy letters have posi-
ons which almost similar, but whch are not a'Vo
bey'een $50 and $50 The Morey letter written In
perfectly hand. But the loops III me nrsI
part Of the letter somewhat larger tnh ~ le lu
part. The oh" in Chinese IN the Morey lel-
should IN the same letter arc perfectly consistent
II was peculiarly ~ the writer Of the Morey eter
that some OF his words were llfei above nc Dase NE
'a' above the line and the ~ was Deiow IT, .
Mr. Biss-Well don't yOu find that there are the same
peculiarilies Philips handwriting and The Morey let
tori . . 49,. 49,. IL. -. ..,-..
little above the line and runs down, oit IN tDe manu-
script Of Philip the writer begins below me nm anu runs
up. This therefore, Is reversed relation me ctoS-
Iugs of the Z" do not agree In the MCrey ana
Jewell letters. -
Jewell letter with a long letter foil wing the " IT, -
either not crossed at ALL or the cross stroke docs not
The wtncss-wcll, cannot say that it is the case.
Here Judgc Davis reminded Mr. Bliss that he
thought the line of inquiry being pursued was SIM
ply wasting the time of the Court, and That the wit
ness was being interogatcd upon matters which
could not be affected by ms testimony. Mr. Bliss
continued his questions in another direction The
next question
Were yen ever engaged in the cigar buslnessi
Q-Wcrc you engaged in selling druggists bot
tesi A-NOt regularly.
Q-Do you not sell bottles for some one in Philadel-
p.af ,,., ,...,a.
MI Bss-Now witness, was it not act that you sold
some DO Ties and received money for them. for winch
demand al to b. u. tde upon yOur father4
The witness cxcied y)-You are proposing insulting
questions that nave no shadow Of truth IL tnem ap
peal "a lis Honor tor protection
Q.-Are not the resemblance between the Morey ana
Jewell letters such as would result from "a successful
Mr. Broobc-I object to that question. Both letters
here II evidence, and
Judge Davs-You need not answer u.
by Mr.. Brooke Have You examined the jewell letter
with relation to the ascortanment OF any intention on
the part Of she writer 10 depart from the characteristics
OF the MOley letter
say probable intention, but there has
been departure from the natural handwriiog OF the
ell letter find the two words. OF ART, are connected
and also two more. So" In the Jewell letter there
limitations Is different in the Jewell and Rockwell letters
As the signatures, Is angular IN the writing "a
compared with tho otner, ana there are many other
points Of difference.
At this point Mr.. Howe addressed tie Court and
said
We ask for the same Indulgence tnat was granted to
the prosecuton-an adjournment until Tuesday. the
prosecution going on with their reOutng evidence IN
he meanwhile The ground Of the application is con-
tanned tell grains which are private but when
submit Ia the Court and counsel on ne Oiher side mes
serger was to Lawrence and Sl2j gwen MN,
ami necessary that Mr.. Mercy should be here, not
only submit 10 crnsscxaminatiOn but also to es-
tfy to another matter.
Mr. BIss-We expected to put orr testimony in, but
this VIII cave yOu with fresh testimony wnen We get
thr ugh.
Mr. Howc-It is certainly necessary that we should
have Opportunity 10 call Mr.. Morey This proceeding
has now assumed Tue face OF an ordinary prosecution.
and IS well suo~n tnat ne Grand Jury VIII he in Sos
s'L during The entire term II Is III the interest OF
everyone uu'c;e with the that We should have
the opportunity % htiug me testimony IN.
MI BlissN Now have witne on their way horc to
rebul Nj Morc testimony II Is me intention " the
prosecution % DE here tomorrow, ana .en pas our OUT
Glow ~ noes on ihe stand
Mr. Bcil-Howeycr insane It may be.
Mr.. Amcs recalled 10 say that by the trans
parent card system applied By Carvoiho he only
discovered difference OF some degrees between
the Morcy and Jewell letters.
Ex-Assembymau William II. Warning was callod
T. testify 10 the character 81 James McDcTmoit,
whom. lac sad he had met IN political way. lie had
never heard any one speak for or against McDer-
motifs ycrIcity.
Thomas \. DYER. of BROOKLYN testified TO McDor-
motifs good ,puiatIon. This witness vas severely
cross, Namned by MI Brooke. Nhi'c the cross
examination was u progrco,. McDemOtt, who was
IN the courtroom, became very much cNcIted. Mr..
Dyer about To leave the witness stand when
McDeruou sprang no and asked IN iond voice:
Is there any Ia brooklyn WuO bears better char
actcr than dof
The question was directed 10 the witness, bur in
the excitement his reply could not be heard Nc
Dermott, however. shouted out:
Not that he knows Of, he SAYS.
This scene caused considerable excitement, and
Mr. Brooke arose and said;
most decidedly object to more counsel than one in
trrrugaiiug the witness.
Mr. .dcDermott-I don't clam TO be a counsel.
Mr.. Eel-so hat one OF the counsel is not iuterrogat
ing the wltn'sS
Tie Judge good humoredly,-T cannot prevent q
witness nterroglung witness when of the stand.
Mr. McDerm0tt, who apparently had lost control
OF himself then arose, and pointing his hand the
counsel for the defence, SAID
And this IS not all. The pres dents OF three banks
viii be here to testify 10 my financial wei ny
moral
The whole courtroom thereupon burst into
laughter. but McDcrmott would not be suppressed
and he ba.an to address the Judge. lie stopped |
with apparent reluctance.
The case WAS ujourned until Tuesday al IL a. m.