National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1881-03-16
THE CHRIsTIANCY CASE.
The Minister'S Ex.Privnte Secretary
Throws Some Light ON It.

Throws Some Light ON II.
The counsel for the plaintiff in the
Christiancy divorce Suit about closed their testi-
mony yesterday. DR.. o. NJ. Ball, whose examna-
ton was continued from the day previous, and the
only correct account of which the counsel admits
was published in THE REPUBLICAN, Of yesterday,
was recalled. The gist of it is contained i'll the
following statement, which the witness sWore 10
and had made part of his deposition:
"In the spring of 1875, soon after Mr.. Chris
tiancys election to the United States Senate was
made his secretary, that is, he intrusted to me
great portion of his private and official correspond
ence, which position held until his departure for
Peru, and during part of one session of Congress
think it was the spring of 1878 was clerk OF his
Committee on Revision of the Laws of the United
States Senate, and when he left for Peru he stated
to Inc that he had some matters of private char
acter which he wished me to attend TO during his
absence. He stated that he suspected his wife of
being unfaithful in her marriage relations, or
words TO that effect, and requested me to keep an
eye on her. In the fall of 1870 received letter
from Mr.. Christiancy informing me of her willfui
departure from Peru, when he was dOmlciled
under peculiar circumstances, and / was advised
to become acquainted with her course OF conduct
after her arrival here l was acting under Judge
ChristaDcys instructions, also the instructions Oh
Hon. Edwin Willis, who had been his former
law partner and intimate friend. In the course
of my inquiries and investigations, ana
in discharge of this duty, many facts
which deemed of serious and damaging cnar-
acter to the defendant came TO my knowledge
But was advised by counsel for the complainant
that of these facts those only which related to the
alleged adultery at the st. James Hotel were avail
able in bringing suit for divorce in this jurisdic-
ton i'll behalf of Judge Christiancy. On this ae-
count was very anxious to know all might
properly know of the conduct of the stranger Giro
whom saw with Mrs. Christiancy at the depot on
the oath day of December, 1879, and for the
further reason that 1 was told on the
next day Och ristmasl by Mr.. Holsehuh, the clerk
then at the st. James Hotel that the lady who ac-
eOmpanied Giro 10 room AZ on that day was not
Giro's wife, but was the wife OF Senator Chris
tiancy; that he knew it was Mrs. Christlancy;
that he had known her by sight for several years;
that ct one time she lived in Alexandria; that he
could and would of any time, identify her as Mrs.
Christianey. He also gave me personal descrip-
ton of her. which satisfied that 1t was Mrs.
Christiancy. All these facts were submitted by
me to counsel and the suit for divorce was begun.
1 may add further, substantially, as stated in my
direct examination here. that never saw the al
legged paTtieeps erinisis Giro before December "a,
1879, after the 18th Of the same month; norhave
I ever been introduced TO him or communicated
with him in any way"
The COUNSEL for the defense did not deem it
necessary to cross examine the witness Proof of
the marriage was put in evidence, and the exani-
nation closed. 1t s probable that the defense will
commence with their side at an early day.