Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-04-18
STAR ROUTE TRIAL.
The Contention at WashingtVn Resumed
The Belford Check Finally Traced to
its Rightful Owner.

The BelfOfd Check Finally Traced 10
its Rtghtful Owner.
WASHINGTON, April demonstrating the
and lily ventilated court room, and the un-
usually long and tedious proceedings at
the beginning of the fifth month of the
second star route trial found the court, jury
and counsel looking we'll and in remark
ably good health. ALI of the defendants
were present. rather unusual occurrence.
VIM. A. Cook opened the proceedings
with statement which he said might
affec. the case under consideration. He
had been informed that notice had
been served upon J. B. Price requiring his
presence in court to-day, under pain of an
attachment. He presented a surgeons
certificate, showing that Price was suffer
ing from a cancerous affection of the eye,
and was unable to attend.
Merrick replied that Price had promised
to attend with his friends at the govern
ment's pleasure, but in view of the facts
as described by Cook the attachment
wonld not be asked for unless it became
absolutely necessary in order to comploy
with the forms of law.
Ex-Postmaster General James was then
called to the stand by the prosecution, and
asked to state whose signature was at
tached to the kilograms shown him by
Reedel on the train from New York TO
Washington, in June, 1881.
Ingersoll Immediately objected, because
it was an attempt to prove the contents of
the kilograms with proper foundation.
Merrick argued that the offer was proper,
and that the foundation had been laid.
Ingersoll maintained that all evidence of
the fact that Dorsey had sent dispatches
was purely collateral. They had not been
spoken of by Dorsey in his direct examina-
ton, and only reference to them was
made during cross examination. It was
therefore collateral matter, and as such
could not be inquired into.
Wilson elaborated this and other points
at length.
Bliss reviewed the evidence relating to
the subject, and he pointed to the fact
that the destruction of all the kilograms
had been shown, and that it was now i'm
possible to prove that such kilograms had
ever been sent except by the person who
sent them.
Upon the question of the collateral ma
ture of Dorsey's evidence Bliss based an
argument of some length, maintaining
that the witness being the defendant and
therefore shielded from summons by the
government, occupied position different
fir N ordinary witnesses and that it was
| not for him Dorsey to say 1t was too late
for the prosecution to introduce proof of
the contents of the telegram.
Ingersoll had ne objection to a state
ment of the contents of the kilograms
by the prosecution. As a part of their
| offer, of course the jury would pay no at
tention to it unless it was proved.
Merrick accordingly stated the contents
| of the dispatches as follows: The first tele
gram, or one of them (they were delivered
| together) was to this effect: SECT off tht
tram at once and return to New York anc
think all is forgiven you" The SECOND
was: "Return at once to New York fol
| Gods sake. Do nothing to injure me ant
my friends. Don't persevere in you
! course"
Ingersoll and Davidge smilingly: 81
that all? Is that all you propose to prove?
Merrick in long argument supported
his offer to prove the signature of thes
dispatches.
| Davidge and Hinkle also argued tn
point.
The court then in rather long ant
elaborate opinion ruled against the prose
cution, basing its decision upon the rule
of evidence.
| The examination was then resumed, bu
IngersoI objected to the next question
asked aud as the objection was sustainet
by the court, the witness was excused.
The prosecution then put on the stand
for the purpose of contradicting John "
Dorsey, three hotel clerks, who showed b
the hotel registers that Reerdel was in Ne
braska and Colorado in April, 1879, al
though Dorsey had sworn he was in Wash
ington.
Judge J. B. Bissel, of Leadville, wa
next called, and examined with regard t
the so-called Belford check.
In the argument as to the admissibilit
of this testimony Bliss said the books sho'
check drawn to j. B. B. He would nc
say who J. B. B. represented, but woul
admit he did not now believe it mean
Belford.
The witness said that in June, 1879, b
saw S. w. Dorsey draw a check or draft i
Leadville to the order of J. B. B. He di
not remember its exact amount, bu
thought it was for about $4,000. Itsswas
De QlV1QeQ among IOur Olu0rouI S0HLlS
men. Judge Bowen, afterwards Senate
Bowen, was one Of the party.
In reply to Ingersoll, witness said hi
: | witness, initials were placed on the checl
and Dorsey suggested that Charles Y
Tankersby, one of the party, collect i
Did not know on what bank the check wa
drawn. 1t had been given Tankersb
, because the latter was Dorsey's attorne.
and the check had to be collected out c
| town.
Yes, it was a draft on New York for $40
|. . interjected S. W. Dorsey.
Witness had never been interested in th
. mail business and the check wss not give
in any such connection.
Was it business transaction? inquire
Merrick.
Witness smiled blandly and the court n
marked, ''You cannot ask that, Mr. Ne1
rick.''
NJ. G. Reerdel was recalled and contrs
dicted j. w. Dorsey where he said tn;
Reerdel was in Washington in April, 1877
5 Bliss then said that with the exceptio
, of the proof of the contents of the Clel