The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1882-07-22
z WHEELING
Brady, and was asked why he had deposit.

Brady, and was asked why he had deposit.
ed check upon Winslow, lIanier l. Co.
with Lewis Johnston, drawn the money
and paid It 10 Brady. He replied that
Brady told him he preferred not 10 take
checks from him for obvious reasons.
Pressed by Wilson upon this point, wit.
ness said, that while there was nothing
actually wrong In tho transaction, evil.
minded persons might put wrong con.
struction upon it The next loan was
In the early part Of January, 1850, $4,000.
Part OF this was paid Brady In cash, ut the
department, and part 10 A. @. Buell. in cash
and checks.
He did not take q note for that. Some.
thing was said about letting il run and
Brady said he would return in a few days.
Long subsequent 10 that Brady gave his
note for this loan. No one was present
when the loan was made or when the note
was given. Brady upon the latter occa.
sion said lie thought Pe.eson's drafts
should have been sufficient security. The
note covered Brady's loan and the amount
given Buell.. This sum, witness was no.
sure whether 1t was ten or twelve thousand
dollaN, was never repaid. "a. 7-7
The next loan was for Sl3,50O, made in
April, 1850, at the banking house OF Hatch
4 Foote, New York. Brady requested him
to deposit that amount to his credit in
that bank. lie told Brady he did not
regarl that as discreet action inasmuch
as he BRADY was Second Assistant Post.
master General and witness was contractor
for n route that had been greatly expedited.
Brady told him it made no difference, but
the amount was finally paid in cash, Brady
giving another note. Brady was in the
private Office OF Hatch & Foote, and no
one saw this transaction 80 far as witness
knew.
Mr.. Wilson presented n paper which
witness identified US the account upon
which Brady had been sued. Mr.. Wilson
called attention to the fact that this ac-
count contained the entry OF loan, ST..
600, which his testimony had placed at
Sl,20O. -
The witness promptly characterized this
rs q clerical error and said it was not cor
rect.
Mr.. Wilson [holding up the paperl is
that not Your signature?
Mr.. Walsh positively refused 10 identify
1t until the entire paper had been submit
ted to him, and he finally prevailed in this
demand. He then acknowledged it as bis
signature, but stated that in swearing TO
the paper lit is the affidavit upon which
the suit was brought) he made mistake
from not giving attention to the figures.
He had regarded the affidavit Us mere
matter OF form, prefunctory.
MIR. Wilson-""Ies, your oaths and testi.
mony are generally perfunc,ory, are they
not?' swE
Witness-"No, sir; think the record
will beai me out in tnat respect"
Mr.. Kellogg said the witness had given
him Sis 900 in postal drafts and u note for
s, 900 drawn BY J. P. Price. Witness had
not loaned Brady any money after June
81. .lSSl, and the Indebtedness had not
been increased except in q slight
degree from Peterson's draft. He had
brought an attachment suit against
Brady in New York, and did not recollect
that he had made affidavit in that case.
This suit had been for $4,000, based upon
a credit OF Sc, 900, when he afterwards dis.
covered an additional credit OF $500 to
Brady. He had given him the
benefit OF the discovery. He had
sent 10 Mr.. Hines, his attorney
at Washington for this account in that in.
stance. Hines is also counsel OF one OF the
defendants in this easel. Perhaps he could
have made up this account from his mem.
DRY, rs he had in Washington, but he pre-
ierrcd 10 have the date.
Wilson at this point read the certified
copy OF the affidavit used in the New York
suit, which was brought on January 18th,
1852.
Wilson called witness attention to the
fact tba. the Indebtedness was placed at
S2,3ii, which was declared to be due
above all credits and claims which could
be allowed. =.
Witness said he was not responsible for
errors made by his attorney. He had as.
sumed his attorney knew his business. He
had certainly been furnished with cor.
rect statement OF facts. e
at don't make any difference" said the
witness, ~ did not get any money any.
how" l.aughter). Counsel here driited
oil into discussion on the meaning OF
claims, counter claims, etc. Getting back
to the subject, Wilson tried to get the wit
ness TO explain the apparent discrepancy
between the accounts in New York and
Washington suits, but Walsh attributed it
solely to bad memory and clerical errors.
Wilson asked witness il it were shown
that Gen. Brady wasnot in Washington from
Dec. 2lst, 1850, until January Sd, 1881, in
what year he would place the interview he
had said he had.
Wilson-"1n 1850, for l should assume he
was in the city," llaughterl
Wilson -"Bnt il the contrary were
proved ?n
.Witness-"l don't believe We have got 10
that point Of the case yet" -
The Court here cut of inquiry in this d.
rcction.
In referring to the interview Walsh
said the papers were placed upon the
table at an early part OF the interview. Mr..
Brady had sat rolling the papers between
his fingers as was his habit, indeed the
witness had done the same. Finally Mr..
Brady put them in his pocket and witness
asked Of him where he intended to take
the papers.
Brady answered he must regard the
matter as settled, and he asked il he
(witness) felt disposed to wrestle with him
in the courts or elsewhere, he was at lib.
erty to do SO. No one had yet succeeded
in that. "a. e
Wilson inquired il witness had ever
before known OF Brady figuring in the
courts.
Witness said he had been pretty
thoroughly discussed by the National Leeis-
lature and perhaps that was higher than
any ordinary court.
Adjourned.
LOST IN THE WOODS.
Details OF the fHic OF Mrs. Wilson and
5- Her Children. E-