The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-11-01
TELEGRAPHIC NEWS
star Route Bribery Business

WashintOn, 31.-In the star route
cases to-day the defense endeavored,
without success, to obtain a state
ment from the witness of the con-
versations between himself and
Governor Wells. The prosecution
objected and the court sustained
the objection. The witness said
that on October 18th last, he made
an affidavit to what is known as the
Ingersoll affidavit. Upon objection
from Gov. Wells the defense was
prevented from questioning the
witness on the subject, the object
being to contradict him. The orig
inal affidavit was then procured and
the witness examined upon its sHb-
ject matter. The witness denied
that Falls name had been men
toned in the affidavit, and
andMs when the document was
exhibited to him containing Falls
name in interlineation, he said he
thought it had been inserted after
be sWore to the affidavit which he
said was in Colonel Ingersoll'S
handwriting. 1t was not true that
he used Falls name on that occa-
sion. So much of the affidavit as
stated that Martin another juror
was to be influenced was untrue.
He did not remember who told him
that Colonel ingersoll wanted to
see him. but he went up to his
Office and made the affidavit which
followed the one made before
Assistant District Attorney Moore.
In his conversation with Payne the
witness made ian appointment for
the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS His object was
to find outthe man behind Payne.
He believed the written agreement
had been destroyed. The witness
denied laughingly, that he had ever
offered Payne $3.50 for a written
agreement, The court remarked
that the matter before him was not
whether the juror had been bribed,
but whether he had been APP
preached. Davis replied thai he
was now trying to make out by the
witnesses own words that he was
unworthy of belief, and that he made
affidavits contradicting one another.
The examination of the witness
was resumed. He denied that he
first learned of the existence of a
written agreement at a restaurant
on Seventh street, when he drank
with Payne. The witness never
told VIM. r. Larse he thought
there was money in the route bust
ness for him-the witness. He
voted for an appropriation made by
by his lodge to send Payne out
jwest. Did not remember whether
Dor not he moved the appropriation
~The crosS-eXamination brought out
no point of Importance. AT the re-
quest of the defense further exam.
! ination of Brown was adjourned
until tomorrow, in order to obtain
by subpoena upon the attorney gen
eral, the affidSvits collected by
Special Counsel Wells. A. B. Viii
liams was called to answer for the
afidavits of Nelson and others. He
said he had returned Nelson's aft.
davit to Nelson. His reason for sc
doing was that he did not be-
lieve this was an honest
prosecution, and that the paper
was wanted for no honest purpose
| For the protection of the witness
| Nelson, who wouldi be called be
fore the court, he done this. Viii
liams was asked whether he wal
present, participating on October
| Is, in the preparation of what wa:
subsequently published as "Colone
Ingersoll's interviews" This cues
| tioa the witness refused to answer
and appealed to the court. The aues
ton was temporarily waived; wit
ness knew subpoena was out for The
| Nelson affidavit when he gave it t.
| Nelson this morning. Gov. Wells
here renewed his question RELATIVE
kto the Ingerson interview, but agal1
the witness declined to answer. Hi
objection was sustained by tn
court. The witness acknowledged
| that he had deliberately, for the pun
pose of evading the subpoena, giver
the affidavit to Nelson. He dit
this because he wished to compe
government to bring Nelson int
court. The witness made tnl
declaration in a cool, defiant manner
charging Gov. Wells with havini
dishonest purpose in calling for tn
papers. He said he acted entlrel.
upon his own responsibility IN thl
matter. IngerSoll knew nothing O