Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1881-11-21

According to the testimony OF the officers who
attend him, Guiteau showed more agitation to dly
than on any day since the trial opened. When he
| was taken from the van in the morning and faced
the crowd, he quailed and drew his breath hard.
once, While Mir. ScOvile was speaking he treGlbled
all over, and buried his face in his hands This
was the only time when he did not appear utterly
| lnd1Herent 10 the proceedings In the court room.
The Case Of Ex.Deputy Auditor Lilley.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE COMMISSIONER BuNpY TO-DAY.
To-day at one o'clock Commi ssoner Bundy called
up the case OF Frederick B. Lilley, ex-deputy au-
| dltOr for the Post Office department, arrested on
Saturday last on the charge OF receiving money
for performing certain services for mail contract
ors. as stated in THE STAR Of Saturday. Mr.. w.
| A. Cook appeared for the government, and Messrs.
Jere Wilson and Enoch Totten for the defendant.
| MIR. Cook stated that the government would be
ready to proceed with the case the wit
nesses arrived, which would be in few minutes.
| TESTIMONY OF P. II. WOODWARD.
| Mr.. p. Ii. Woodward, who sWOre out the warrant,
soon appeared and was sworn. He testified that he
was an inspector OF the Post Office department,
| and was acquainted with MIR. Lley, as also George
+. Brott, who he believes was merchant in New
Orleans after the war; thought that he had been a
mail contractor, having number of routes, more
| than he could specify now: one or two OF which he
brought to the attention OF witness specifically
His knowledge was based on what Brott told him
me defence having objected to what Brott
stated, the testimony was ruled out.
Witness, continuing, said that the accused {Mr
Lilley) was deputy auditor in 1866 and up to about
the middle OF this year.
| QueStiOn.-Have you any letters OF Mr. Ltlley's
| in your possession?
Answer.-I have. [He produced three which
were Inspected by DEFENDANTS counsel. and, one
not having the conclusion, witness explained to
detendantS counsel that these were all that We're
| in his hands
Mr.. Cook proposed to read the letter of Oct. 1st,
Mr. Totten objected, as that was an imperfect
| plain it.
Mr. Cook said he would not press it now, and pro-
ceeded to read one of October 29th in which Illey
says to Brott he will take the lob to extend the
| contract on the Grand Isle route.
Mr. Wilson.-That letter does not affect this
| charge.
Mr.: Cook said that they could read this to show
| the Intimate relations.
Mr. Totten.-Why not ind ict the wife ?"
| Mr. Cook answered that they conld take either
the husband or wife, and proceeded to read the
Mr. Wilson.-What does this have to do with it
| Mr. Cook.-They show "TwO in a bed"
Mr. Totten suggested that only those portions of
the letters affecting the case be read.
| the commissioner, and ii they are not connected
the commissioner could rule it out. Mr.. Cook had
| the letter OF November 10th, in which reference
| was made to one Hancock.
| Mr., Totten.-Better indict Hancock.
| Mr. Cook read:-"H there is any meat in it."
| MI Wilson.-That Is apprOpriate; there is meat
| in the general
Mr. Cook.-That is an assumption.
Mr.. Totten.-We object to the letters.
The Comm1ssfoner.-They will be received, SUBJ
ject to future correction.
| MrWoodward said he received these letters from
| George F. Brott, perhaps in June. He received
| four other papers at the same time, which were
examined by counsel
The defense objected on the ground that they
| did not affect Mr.. Lilley.
uo MT Cook sal said they were letters acknowledging
drafts due him, and in the end it Will appear de-
iendant had something to do with the drafts.
=, me ,I commissioner read the warrant, and said
| That this was one OF the links bearing upon the
charge that Lilley SO filed the drafts as to give
Mr. Wilson.~If this is to be received. every clerk
in the department Will be subject to charges
Mr. Cook.lSo they will be. II we can show that
| they had s'1nger In the pie"
The commissioner said that If the counsel pro-
ceeded to follow this up these letters would be
ceived subject to their being collected.
Mr.. Wilson said this was not evidence for the
letters were from the sixth auditor and not from
Mr: Lilley, and they had nothing on earth to do
stand on mere technicalities they wished the case
| to be proceeded with under the rules.
Nj: Totten asked II these letters showed that Mr..
L1lley filed the drafts, and he asked how 1t could
bear on the case in the slightest degree.
procured these papers?
Mr.. Woodward.-From Mr.. Brott.
-, commissioner Bundy asked If it could be shown
Mr. Cook said that he desired to fer t%te stmnT
70 SLOW that the drafts came into the custody Of
MI: Woodward said the signature was a stamp.
ana ne could not say that the papers were genuine.
Mr. MI. la Milson.IMr McGrew never saw them
client - -ANo' 'ue' "eie so''en up oS your
Mr.: woodward received statement from MIR.
| Brott.
L Mr.. COOk.-PrOduce it
Mr.. Totten.-You need not trouble yourself. Mr.
| Woodward, for we viii object to it.
| Mr.. woodward produced the statement
Mr.. Cook said tomorrow they would have the
| records here, and Mr.. Brott.
| Mr.. Wilson-Why not go before the grand iury,
| Mr.. Cook.-We went in with an Information
Mr.. Totten.-And came out again.
Mr. Cook:-"And uncovered your guns" He says
fhan hQf
the rules of the law. So we came to the Commits
sioner and propose to proceed step by STEP
The hearing was continued until one O'Clock tn.
morrow.
i District Government Affairs.
TESTING THE LEGALITY OF THE BUILDING REGryI A..
i TIONS.
Not less than three persons who have been nott
fed by the inspector OF buildings to remove old.
dilapidated structures, which have been con-
j deuaned have NEGLECTED To do xtox