The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-02-13


cital OF Rerdelrs acts without bringing him
into association with the other defendants,
the rule would confine the testimony in that
way
The witness related the story of what is
known as the "Rerdeil confession" already
published, using Rerdels language as near
as possible. He told Of the formation OF the
conspiracy; of the methods of undertaking
and of securing increase. He described the
process Of affidavit fixing and OF getting up
petitions. The methods of bookkeeping
were detailed, showing how Brady
was known in the ledger under
false name Then came a
recital of the circumstances arising from the
congressional investigation. and of how
Brady had reduced the pay upon certain
routes on that occasion, and afterward re-
stored it to the original figure.
Messrs Wilson and Davidge renewed their
objections to admission of evidence relating
to the other defendants, and the court finally
decided not to admit Rerdell's statement as
to what share of the profits Brady was to re-
ceive.
The witness continued, but so many tech
nical objections were interposed by the de-
Tense that it was with much difficulty he
managed TO tell a connected story He said
Rerdell had books and papers in Dorseys
handwriting that would corroborte his state
-ments and he proposed going to New York
city to obtain them. The cross-examinaIion
was brief
Acknowledgment James was then
called.
Mr. James testified to the statement made
to him by Rerdell at the Arlington. in the
spring OF 1881, in substance the same as the
statement made to MacVeagh. Two or three
days afterward he met Rerdell on a train
coming from New York. He said he had
been TO New York to get the books of which
he had spoken to MacVeagh that he had the
books, and had had a conversation with
S. w. Dorsey. At Trenton the conductor
brought in a telegram for Rerdell,
which Rerdell showed to witness. 1t
was request TO Rerdell to return to New
York; but he said he would not return, as he
was ticketed through to Washington. Rer
dell said he was watched, and could not talk
with the witness. The conversation then
closed. Rerdell came on TO Washington.
The witness sent for Brady in the first or
second week of March, 1881, having discov-
cred an order of increase on the Rawlins and
White river route. Brady not being in, Chief
Clerk French came in. and witness talked
with him about the route. The next morning
Brady came in with the sheets containing a
statement of the remssons he had asked for,
and asked the,witness if he was to understand
that economy was 10 be the policy of his
(James's) administration. The witness an
swered yes" The witness was not permit
ted 10 give his conversation with French. He
said he told French to revoke the order for
increase on the White river and Rawlins
route He discovered in September that it
had not been revoked, and then revoked it
himself He remembered such a claim
as the Jennings claim, about which sew
eral persons talked to him. Rerdell never
made any application to witness about the
claim. The witness wanted to make state
ment about the history of the claim, but the
court would not admit it,
1T is very interesting history, no doubt"
said Mr. Ingersoll
at is most interesting history" said the
witness, and after a pause, he continued:
The claim was referred to the Attorney
general, who pronounced it bold fraud. /
never heard of Rerdell being connected with
it,"
APPLICATION OF EVIDENCE
Mr.. James was exc used, and James G.
Rankin, OF Rawli6s, who was on the stand
when the court adjourned last Friday was
recalled. The objection made on Friday
evening to the witness telling what Rerdell
said about Brady and Dorsey then came up
and was argued.
The defense contended that Brady's official
acts could not be adduced in proof of the
existence of a conspiracy. The court spoke
of the difficulty of selecting a time in the
course of the reception OF testimony when it
could say that primea fscie conspiracy had
been made out. Thire was nothing to enable
the court to do this. Greenleafs rule was that
when evidence was OF enough weight
10 Justify the assumption that there was
possible conspiracy, it became the duty of
the court to submit it to the jury for their
judgments In the present case, much of
the evidence tended to establish conspiracy.
As to Brady it had been said that this court
had no appellate jurisdiction over his Off
cial acts. His liability to impeachment was
no bar to his indictments and the court
could not assent to the proposition that his
official acts were beyond inquiry. If it ap-
peared that he was party to the conspiracy
md shared the profits then his Off
cial acts were submissible to
jury The extrayagant expenditures in
connection with the star routes was in evil
Hence; also, the character of the sudden or
Hers for increase and expedition and it was
for the jury 10 pass upon the necessity there
for. As TO himself, the court confessed that
the evidence had made a very deep impress
sion upon him, as showing that the orders
were of bona fde character; he therefore
DECLINED tosexcept Brady from the operation
nf the evidence as it concerned all the de-
PENDANTS alike.
Alessrs. Ingers0ll and Wilson Immediately
noted exceptions to that portion of the deci
lion wherein the court describes the effect of
he evidence upon himself.
The witness then proceeded with his testi-
m1ny. He said that Rerdell told him that
ex-senator Dorsey was interested in the bust
ness. and he had enough influence with
Brady to secure increase and expeditions; the
witness therefore took the sub-contract. On
tross-exantnation the witness said he was
not under the impression that any fraudu-
mt increase was contemplated.
MIR. INGALLS, BELIEF.