Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1882-07-13
THE STAR ROUTE TRIAL.
Proceedings I'm the Criminal COur,
To.day-DccisiOn of Judge Wylic-
R0Onc'S Testimony.

TO.tlay-DcCiSiOn OF Judge WYlic-
HoOnc's Testimony.
When the Criminal Court met this morning the
star route trial was resumed. Mr. Albert E. Boone
was called to the stand by Mr.. Merrick. The wit
ness testified to knowing the various defendants.
Since 1876 he had been mail contractor, and had
HAD 1,1OO ROUTES At ONE TINE.
None OF his routes had ever been expedited. In
1877 witness was one OF the original parties in the
contract business with the Defendants He met
8. W. Dorsey in the department one day In Nc
vember, 1877. The witness was about to give an
account of
CONVERSATION WITH DORSEY,
when the defense objected, on the ground that 1t
occurred anterior to the date when the offences
charged in the conspiracy were committed The
court allowed Mr.. Merr1ck to ask what was done
n pursuance OF that conversation. The witness
said that he called at Mr.. Dorsey's house that
night by request Dorsey showed him letter from
Peck.
Here again an objection was interposed by the
defence and argued by Mr. T0tten, TO the effect
that acts and letters outside OF the limits OF the
statute OF limitations could not be admitted.
THE COURT DECIDES THE EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE
Judge Wylie, referring to authorities, held that
this proposed evidence was admissible as showing
merely that there was an association in existence
before the time set out in the Indictment 1t was
| crime fe would require the prosecuting oficers,
however, to make known to the court how they
to show the connection OF the various
PENDANTS through this testimony.
After an argument by Mr.. Ingersoll,
Mr.. BLISS SAID
that the government proposed to show that the
witness was brought in at an elrly stage OF 1877 or
1878; that he to be jointly interested with the
defendants; that they continued along for aeon
siderable time; bids were put in; contracts
awarded, and then, at certain Stage OF the matter
he was informed by one OF the parties that owing
to the Necessity or bringing in money, and owing
/ nf nr,d drr< To I'm.
(Boone} he was to go out Of the combination and
another person was to come in. This arrangement
9e Or Us5 H ae
shewn tnat Brady did do something for them.
They proposed to show also that the parties were
each interested In the combination.
Mr.. INGERSoLL SAID
the defence had stated in their opening that there
Was partnership formed and the routes were
divided. Admitting that Mr. Boone would swear
to everything that Mr. Bliss had said, it would
throw no light upon the Issue at trial. He object
the facts involved were outside of the statute OF
li,n tatOns He held that a great amount of tes-
tiHohy had been offered here that did not tend to
Qe, pnaants what was necessary for tue proSecu-
tisar1e show, Il they showed ANYTHING, was that
2he sbhblnation was corrupt. They must show
THAI kir. Brady received money, or was moved by
Some other corrupt motive,
Mr.. Chandler argued also that the proof should
be confined to the time within which the overt acts
were charged in the Indictment to have been origl-
mated by the conspiracy.
MR. MERRICK, REPLYING,
submitted that even II the objections regarding
the statute OF limitations were we'll founded, yet
they Genld prove the business relations of these
lsfeAdants in transactions sinilaf to those out of
Which the charges arose at any time prior to the
alleged conspiracy Their previous close and con-
Combination nrecedes tonsnirnrV. comhination ina f.
an element OF conspiracy. Mir Merrick referred to
Mr.. m, M,cSweeny's s. opening address, wherein it was
the contracts were taken, having advised against
them In order to aid his friends in getting out Of
sSew by M .as
actively engaged IN this combs lion, and instead
OF being pious genius restraining the Inconsid-
members OF his family, was. IN fact the inspiring
genius OF the whole transaction, and the moving
power that impeled the whole thing forward.
THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
Mr.. Ingersoll In reply, argued again that the
statute OF limitations must begin somewhere. II
the conspiracy had been formed and carried into
execution out of the limits Of the statutes, he
asked whether the indictment would have been
made good by putting a lie in It by stating that
the conspiracy was entered into one year after it
really was, and then when they came to the
evidence, to prove that 1t was entered into one
Ingersoll denied that s. w. Dorsey had been in
any Way interested in this combination or partner
SHIP h except except as as stated by the defence nor could
except as proved by these contracts and sub-cOn-
tracts; certain routes had gone to him by sub
what he had Done. Mr.. Ingerson argued that II
the conspiracy became crime with the first
overt act, then It must have begun when the bids
were put In 1877, which was clearly beyond the
bounds OF the statute OF limitations.
Mr: Wilson argued at some leAgth against the
was proposed to ofIer the Declaration Of some per-
son DelOre the conspiracy was formed.
JUDGE wYLrE SAID
he thought the statement Of the government as to
| Senator of the United States being concerned in
these contracts should have no weight with the
that way he was not now under indictment for
that, but for conspiracy. Every act done in pur-
suance OF conspiracy must be done subsel uent
ton taken by the defence, that no evidence could
be received to show the existence OF conspiracy
roneous. 1t was no evidence that the CONSPIRACY
had not existed since the date named to show that
1t had existed before. He thought IL would be
bination at date anterior to the alleged conspi-
racy FOR the purpose at least OF showing their
@ He ege i1g was mot
the declaration OF conspirator prior to the con-
spraey or since its dissolutlon SO far as this ev-
dence went to show an ass0eiation-an intimate
business relation between there partieS-he thought
1t was competent.
THE EXAMINATION OF MR. BOONE
was then continued by Mr.. Merr1ck. The witness
was asked on what business he went to Mr.. Dor
oCS AouSC, dS uc ulSCOVct6Q 6IGET uc gut lnoEo.
MI. Ingersoll objected In behalf OF Mr.. Dorsey,
but Immediately withdrew the objection, MIR. Dor
sey, who sat behind him saying "Let him state
everything he knows about It."
Mr.. Wilson, for Mr.. Brady. however said he OBJ
Jected TO his stating what rmightf have been de-
clared to him by Mr. Dorsey or others.
MI: Merrlck said that he expected to prove that
the business between Mr.. Dorsey and the witness
was that bids should be put fn Or something else
aone FOR the common bepsnt pf Dorsey, Peck,
Miner and others, that theeeparpership was then
formed, and Mr.. Boone had his p8rt assigned him.
Judge Wylie said that w&aan Innocent arrange
ment, and he would admit the Evidence simply to
show the relations OF the parties
Mr. Henkle argued against the admission of the
evidence, but the court adhered to his decision.
exceptions were noted by the defence.
Mr.. Merrlck said he proposed to follow this tes-
tlmOny with evidence OF interviews held after
wards between Miner and the witness
BOONEs STORY.
Mr.. Dorsey, the witness said, handed him letter
from Mr.. Peck. suggesting that Some one be pro-
cured to take charge Of the matter OF getting con-
tracts. The arrangement proposed by Mr.. Dorsey
was to have some one put In bids at the next let
ting 10 behalf OF Miner and hts UOrseys) brother
ln-laW. What 1t was proposed Tor witness to do
was 10 procure the necessary infOrmattOn and
prepare the papers, to be ready when Peck and
John w. Dorsey came to Washington. Witness
said John w. Dorsey, Peck, Miner and himself