The Portland daily press., 1883-03-30
THE STAR ROUTES.
Dorsey In the Hands of the Cross Exam
iners.

dorsey In the Hands of the Cross Exam
" WARRINGTON, March 29.-The Star ronte
Lriai was resumed this morning, IDgersoll con
linuing the examination OF Dorsey. lngersoll
asked the witness II he ever had given a
check to James b. Belford
Inc witness said he never lold Rerdell that
ne had given check for $1,000 TO Belford. nor
uiu NO tell him to charge q check OF that or
books
omngef ange1solnDid you ever give check for any
Answer-Not dollar. never had trans
acton TO the extent Of one cent with the ex-
ception Iof what You stated to the court the
otnsr day the presentation of rifle
Rerdell.
The witness was present at q conversation
between Rerdel and Bosler about June 10Th,
zoth or list, at his house on | street. pencil
memorandum was the subject Of the conversa-
% e,on. herdell was telling Bosler that he had
SHOWN 70 McVeagh memorandum in imita-
uon OF the witnesses handwriting, Rerdel
Wen, 70 the waste haskell, picked out the pieces
and iald them on the table. The writing re-
sempied the witnesses handwriting 80 closely
tnat ne was unable TO distinguish between
them, but the witness never wrote that
memorandum.
Aitsr few unimportant questions direct ex-
ANIMATION closed and Mr. Merrick began the
cross examination.
i. Mr, Msrrick pushed the inquiry in regard to
this subject asking why Peck who was out
there near rontes had delegated to him (Dor-
seyl Senator OF the United States the work OF
managing routes. Witness said he did not see
why the fact OF his being Senator should dis
qualify him. Merrick reminded witness OF his
distance from the routes, but witness adhered
TO his original statements. Witness
had no recollection of sending
a check to p @. Reynolds for $b5260; did not
know where John Dorsey was on July IL,
1878. A letter was produced but witness had
no recollection OF signing John Dorsey's name
to it. Merrick endeavored 60 put the paper in
evidence to show that under Pecks name wit
ness had those contracts. The fact that wit
ness could not see the paper was an obstacle
that could not be removed and the attempt
failed.
The court rendered an opinion at some
length on this subject saying the gen uinness
OF the paper had not been shown in any way
and where evidence was lost by the death Of
wl.ness psisnes b~ Or loss as "a the present
admit OF the use of no expedients to supply
place OF evidence and knew of no relief from
tha consequence to parties affected.
Merrck then offered in evidence contracts
purporting to be signed by Peck with the same
object. de wished to show that Dorsey signed
Peck's name and understood the same objec-
tion would not apply as in the case of the
letter.
Argument was again made at length and
this offer was also rejected.
Witness was nsxt questioned at length In
reference to Miners movements during
and 1873, but he did not recoleet much about
them, Their relations during the time
pleasant. Merrick tried to get witness 10 M
some definite statement in regard to Miners
location IN December and July, 1877 and 1878
but witness declined 10 make any such state
ment. When pressed he would respond II
don't think anything about the matter" How
came Miner here In January, 1878" INQUIRED
Merrick, "On the cars presume He also
refused to say positively whether or not he
had written TO Miner to come here. Miner
usually stopped at witness's Aouse when in
Washington and used an Office Ia his house
whore he prepared his bids. Witness pre-
sumed he had recommended Miner to Peck as
man fitted in every way TO engage in mail
business. Witness never saw John Dorsey
and Miner at work together In the Office upon
bids Might have seen John Dorsey and
Hoone at work but was positive that he twit
ness) had nothing 70 do with the preparation OF
the bids. Did not know whether or not Peck
did any OF the work.
Merrick inquired how it was that the estab-
lishment was working under witness's roof and
he knew nothing OF it. "What did have 10
do with it?" angrily replied the witness. THAT
is not my question but it is what | am going to
find out" retorted Merrick" You had moth
ing to do with the business?"
A.-No sir.
crest?
Al did not. I thought It could bs ar
ranged.
Q.-Why did you employ him?
or John Dorsey.
Q.-what were the instructions contained
Ia the letter.
Al do not remember.
Q-Did. you tell Boone to write ont west
about the routes?
A.-Yss
Q-Why?
A.-Because / was requested to do So
Q.-How. in the letter?
iA.--Yes
ts.-I thought you did not remember the in
structions contained in II?
Al do not remember anything else
Judge Wylie adjourned the court until to-
n1orr0T.