The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-06-13

Washington, 12.-Tha hearing Of the
star route cases was resumed. Amos s.
Wilson, one Of the Journal clerks in the
postofice department, knew Rerdell and
Miner; Rerdell had often been in his
Office. He was asked what routes
Rerdell had been interested in, and tie
defense objected to the question, but wit
ness was finally allowed to answer. He
said Rerdell came to irquire when war
rants would be issued to j. w. Dorsey
and Peck. Miner appeared in his oWa
interest and for Vaile.
Quite q number of contractors held q
large number Of contracts individually.
and msny Of them employed agents to
look after their business before
the department. It was not, there
fore, considered an unusual cir
cumstancs when RerdelI and
Miner appeared on behalf of J. w,
Dorsey aud Vale; Rerdell and Miner
never conVsrsed together 10 his hesrin L.
had q power Of attorney from j. w.
Dorsey, but presumed the official files
would show. His division had all the
warrant had not appeared correct it
for comparison and correction. Orders
for expedition signed by the second
assistant postmaster general would be
necessary before they could have been
Bsid. At the conclusion Of the examins-
ton Of this witness, Irgersoll exclaim ed
"bring US another witness, just like this
one"
Inspector Wood ward testified that al.
the passes received By him from Mr..
Brewer, postal employee, had bsen kept
| without. ohSnge in ais custody. No
newspaper man had ever seen him or
written an article in his room sircs he
had taken possession OF them. Witness
! wss subjected to severe cross-sxRmins-
ton by Wilson, with the purpose OF
showing that . had confused and mixed
up different papers and perhaps placed
them in wrong packets, but he
maintsined that nothing of thg
kind happened to his knowiadg J
although they may have been misplaced
through accident. Merrick then offered
the papers (they are orders, petitions and
| af6idaTits referring to different routesJ
in evidence, saying in reply to an To-
qairy that he intended to present dur
ing the trial all the papers on file in the
department referring in any way to these
contracts. The papers were then pre-
sented in their order, the first beng &C
order for increase and expedition upon
the route from Kearney to Kent, Ne
| brsska. The defense msde the point
! that the paper WAS signed by one French,
aud not by Brady, rs get out IN the in
| dicIment. 4 long argument ensued rs
tn the admissibility Of this particular Sd
OF papers. The court ruled the DapeI
might be admitted as matter explanatory
| OF the allegations in the Indictment. Ar
| exception was noted.
Brewer being recalled, said Mr.. Root
| correspondent Of the New York 1EB1eS
| had been in his room several times, ans
| had examined the papers. Root had
been introduced by Judge Riley. another
employee of the poStofice department
| who said Postmsster-G General James had
directed that Root be admitted access tC
| the files. Altogether witness thought
several weeks were spent in this exami-
nation. Recess.
/ After recess Norton was recalled By
! government, and in answer to wilson
| acknowledged that be had talked with
! Bliss since giving his testimony aud
| Riiss had told him ha had made mis-
take in his testimony as to the revision.
sry power possessed by the pay division
| over orders for increase and expedition
| In answer to the prosecution witness said
they could not correct these orders. They
must pass them when they came from
| the second assistant postnaster-gsneral'
! office. They did, however, 60 over the
calculations in cases Of increase.
Merrick again proceeded with the in
PRODUCTION OF papers. On the back of one
of the orders for increase and expedition
ware the words: 'DO this. Brady" in
| blue pencil, and Merrick asserted that j:
WAS Brady's method OF signing orders.
While one Of the petitions was being ex-
ahmed, insolvency made the point
that the signatures to it must ba
| proved, because the law did not require
such psper to be on file in the department.