The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1882-06-14
THE STAR ROUTE CASES.
The Unexpected Ruling by Judge Wylie
Occasions a Temporary Postponement.

Occasions Temporary Postponement.
WAsHINeToN, June 9.-In the Criminal
Court this morning the Government called
ex-Attorney General MacVeagh as the first
witness in the Star Route cases. MacVeagh
testified he had a conversation with Randall
in June, 81. Merrick asked witness TO give
the details of the entire conversation to the
best of his recollection.
Objected 10 on the ground the witness
must give the date OF the interview to make
il competent evidence, and for other rea-
sons. Totten denied the evidence was COM
petent for any purpose in this trial. The
date of the conspiracy was placed in 20. and
this confession was made long afterward, in
June, 81.
Mr. lngersoll argued no one would con-
tend that Randalls confession was intended
to further the objects of conspiracy. 1t was
necessary to prove the existence of a con-
spiracy before trying TO introduce such evil
dence as this.
MeTrick was about to reply, when the
Court interrupted him TO inquire whether
ne was prepared 10 assert that confession
was intended 10 help along the conspiracy.
Because II II was not, regardless OF the other
facts, it would certainly not be good evi-
dence against Randall.
Mr.. Merrick replied he thought that the
question could best be answered By hearing
. testimony.
Judge Wylie-But you must first prove
that there was 2 conspiracy.
&r. Merrick asserted the confession was
dhe best possible proof of the existence of a
conspiracy.
Judge Wylie-Oh, no; / think you are
wrong and the contrary proposition true.
Merrick-But the body of dead men may
never De found
Judge Wylie-You must prove that he
has been missing for long time before as
sQmiDC him 10 be dead
TheCourt in answer 10 an inquiry by Mr..
Merrick replied even II he should be pre-
pared TO show that every one OF the defend
ants had made separate Acknowledgements
of having engaged in conspiracy it would
not be admissible evidence. A conspiracy
must be made out by circumstances. Ii
this confession should prove that Rerdell
met certain of the defendants on certain oc-
casions, perhaps it would be admissible.
The prosecution should cOnhne their ques-
'tion TO facts which would prove conspiracy.
This was a very important point in the case.
Mr.. IDgerSoll-Hes, if your Honor please,
it is the whole of il.
Mr.. IngersoN closed the argument on this
point, which he regarded as of the highest
importance, by saying that he regarded the
faiiuTe of the Government TO produce any
authorities pr:ma iacie evidence that the
law was altogether on his side.
At the conclusion OF lngersOlls argument
Judge Wylie decided that the evidence was
not admissible at this stage of the trial.
When he was satisfied from the evidence OF
the existence of conspiracy he would allow
this testimony TO be introduced. Judge
Wyie concluded by saying: "A person
could only convict himself by confession,
and could not even do that until crime
was made out F"
Merrick remarked that, OF course, this de-
6ision would compel him to postpone the
introduction OF the testimony he had pro-
posed TO introduce, and MacNeagh was ex-
cused.
Mr. Merrick explained he had himself be-
Eeved this evidence was not presented at the
best time, and he had only consented to It's
introduction TO oblige Mr.. MacNeagh and
, another witness who were desirous of leaving
the city.
After recess. George J. Brewer, clerk in
the contract division of the POstOtfice De-
Yartmsnt. testified that Brady did not act
upon The papers Immediately upon their
presentation. Some times days elapsed.
There were several hundred of them which
had not been acted on when Brady left the
service. Il was the common practice, which
prevails at present, 10 increase the service
after the contract was awarded and before
its execution was begun.
John B. Sleeman, chief of the pay divis-
ion of the Sixth Auditors office of the
Treasury Department described the system
of payments The only way in which con-
tractors could receive money from the
Treasury for service performed was upon. a
warrant signed by the Postmaster General.
Although the witness had seen Minor and
Rerdell in his Office at the same time, be
never knew OF their acting together upon
any one contract.
Adjourned.
Attorney General Brewster was in the
Court in the afternoon
,Ingerssll Causes Laughter BY His Sarcasm
WAsHINGroS, June 12.-The hearing o.
the Star Route cases was resumed. Amo:
N. Wilson, one of the Journal clerks in the
Postofice Department, was recalled, but his
testimony was unlmportant. II. D. Norton
Chief of the Finance Division of the Post
office Department, knew Iredell and Minor
Iredell had often been in his Office. Norton
was asked what routes Iredell had been in
terested in and defense objected g. the ques
ton, but the witness was finally allowed tC
answer. He said Iredell came to inquire
when a warrant would be issued 20 J. w
Dorsey and Peck.
Minor appeared in his own interest and
for Vaile.
Quite number Of contractors held large
mum berOf contracts individually, and many
of them employed agents to look after theiI
business before the Department. 1t was not
therefore considered an unusual circum
stance when Iredell and Minor never con
ngersed together in his hearing.
In answer 10 a question by the foreman o.
the Jury, witness said he did not know tha
Iredell had the power of attorney from j
w. Dorsey, but presumed the official hle:
would show. In answer 10 the Government
counsel, he said his division had all data re
lating to these contracts, and If q warrant
had not appeared &c be correct il would have
been returned to the Auditor for compari
son and correction. The order:
| for expedition signed by The
| Second Assistant Postmaster General were
| examined, and if they were found not to b,
in accordance with the law the connection
by the Second Assistant Postmaster Genera
. would have been necessary before they
could have been paid. At the conclusion o
| the examination of this witness, ingersol
exclaimed Bring us another witness jus
like this one"
Inspector Woodward testified all paper
received by him from Mr. Brewer, postal EN-
ploye. had been kept without change in hi
custody. No newspaper man had ever seeI
them or written an article In bis room Sine
he had taxen possession of them.
This witness was subjected TO severe cross
examination by Nilsson, with the purpose o
showing he had confused and mixed up diff
ferent papers, and perhaps placed them IL
wrong packets, but he maintained nothing
of the kind happend to his knowledge al
though they may have been misplaced
through accident.