Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-09-05
WAS KEY DECEIVED:
&haf Is the Question Which the Court De-
cides has no Bearing on the Case-A
Lengthy Discussion.

Lengthy Discussion
WASHINGTON, Sept. 4.-This morning
Henkle, of the counsel for the defense in
the star route trial, resumed his address to
the jury. He called attention to the fact
that the postmaster general had been
called by the defense to prove the policy
of the department had been toexpediate
the service.
The Court And it was ruled out by the
court.
Henkle-And it was ruled out by
Court (sternly )-And the the court viii
arrest your course of remarks On that sub
ject.
Henkle-I was not going to say what the
postmaster general said.
Court (interrupting) You have no right
TO say what he said.
Henkle-I was going simply to say that
we proposed to ask him what his policy
was, and whether those orders did not con-
form to his policy, and that the court would
not allow the question to be put. Was
there any harm i'll that, your honor?
The Court-What right have you to
talk on that subject?
Henkle- Have I not right to say what
we, by order Of the court, could not do?
Have [ not a right to say that your
honor ruled that the question of policy
was not in the case?
The Court do not know whether I
said it on that occasion. 1 did say that
we were not engaged in any question OF
policy, but that we were trying a fragrant
conspiracy.
Henkle-And may not say that?
The Court-You shall not interfere with
the rights of the counsel in addressing the
jury OF with the rights of the jury, but
when the court has ruled upon any ques-
ton [ think it is not asking too much of
the counsel to- yield to the court.
Henkle-I beg your honor's pardon if
the court understands me to mean to over
ride your honors decision. I take it all
back and say that / never intended it.
The Court am not talking about in
tention, am talking about the effect of
your argument
Mr.. Henkle then went on to show that
the Indictment charged that the post
master general had been deceived, and as
serted that the burden of the proof was on
the prosecution. 1--WE brought on Post
master Key" continued Henkle, land
these gentlemen could, if they wanted to,
have asked him if he approved OF those
orders or not
Il must declare" broke in the court in
dignantly, that that is subterfuge un-
worthy of your character. The
court will not allow it to
go further. 1 attempted to arrest
your remarks before, and you proceeded in
order under your pledge, and 1 think this
thing is altogether beneath your standing
at this bar. must exercise the powers OF
the court if cannot rely upon your loyal
ty as member of the barr
Henkle-I submit with all becoming
propriety to the rebuke of the court. but
want to reason about it. In ajustifcati on
to myself did not know
that was transgreSSing.
I thought was proceeding exactly within
the line of the remarks of the counsel on
the other side. Let me ask your honor (if
you have cooled little) whether it was not
competent for the counsel to remark upon
what his adversary could have proved had
he wanted to-
Court-The postmaster general was your
witness.
Henkle---But can I not say what they
might have proved if they wanted to.
The Court is only subterfuge. I
use plain word because / cannot use any
other.
Henkle-I do not object to plainness of
language. l rather like it.
Court declare to you as the Judge
ment of this court pronounced over and
over again, that it is a matter of the most
perfect Indifference what the opinion of
the postmaster general was. If the post
master general had been stepped
in the most fraudulent conspiracy
and was not embraced in this Indictment
it would have made no difference.
Henkle-Certainly not.
Mr. Totten-The charge in the indict-
ment is that the postmaster general was
deceived. If he were deceived the prose
cution might have proved it and Renkle
had right to follow the precedent of
Merrick and comment on their not having
proved it.
Court-Do you say he was not deceived {?
Totem Certainly we do. Counsel hav e
a right to comment on the fact that they
had the postmaster general in the court
room, and if he had been deceived by Brady
they might have asked him about it. but
they did not do so.
Wilson reminded the court that Merrick
had commented upon the failure Of defense
to call Boster and inquired the difference
between the two cases.
Henlzle-Well. I submit to the rebuke
for doing what was done by the other
side.
Court-The difference is this, the indict-
ment charges these persons were engaged
in conspiracy, the object of which was to
obtain money from the United States by
imposing on the postmaster general. The
postmaster general was brought by the
defense and placed on the witness stand.
and an offer made to prove by him that it
was the policy of the department to expe-
dite and increase services. That evidence
was excluded by the court.
A few moments ago you were referring
to the fact..that you had brought the post
master general here for the purpose of
proving the policy of the department.. 1
interrupted that because there was no
evidence for the purpose of reaching the
same thing; you turned about and said we
are not permitted to comment
upon the action OF the court.
but I will pursue the same.
line Of observation, and that
is that the prosecution might have called
the postmaster general to prove ne had
been imposed upon