The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-02-24

crushed; he supposed he could be prosecuted
for perjury in making the first affidavit.
He did as Dorsey desired, and on the day fol-
lowing the interview gave the affidavit to
Dorsey in Bosler's presence. Dorsey wrote
in the words, land Others" and then, strik-
ing match, burned the pencil-draft of the
affidavit. The witress did not remember
telling MacVeagh and Woodward that Dor
sey gave w. II. Turner l, 500 or 1000 shares
of mining stock to influence his official &C
ton; he did show them memorandum to
that effect. Did not recollect telling Wood
ward that Dorsey gave James N, Tyner 1000
shares of the same mining stock to influence
in some way his official action. Remembered
showing the memorandum. The memoran-
dunn was in the handwriting of S. w. Dor
sey, and was given witness by Dorsey 1t
was in Rerdell's desk at his Office when he
was sent to jail but he has not seen it since.
Mr. Ingersoll called the attention of the
court to the fact that it has been alleged that
Rerdell initiated Dorsey's writing. He re-
ferred to a statement made by the witness on
Wednesday concerning Congressman Bel
ford, whom he Qngersoll) believed to be a
perfectly honest man. The witness had
stated that check for So, 900 had been given
Mr.. Beford and the amount charged to
Mail" Now, the fact was that Dorsey had
in his possession peculiar kind of rifle.
Mr.. Belford saw it and wanted one. Dorsey
procured one for him, and in payment drew
q CHECK LOT 5ZJ 11dC CHECK was IOr bHe
rifle, and was marked on the stub against
]. B. B. That was the only transaction be-
tween them. OF course, Belford did not
know anything of that check, for it was not
given him, but to the person from whom the
rife was purchased. Mr.. Ingersoll de-
sired, he said, to go into this memoran-
dunn to show that it was made
entirely by the witness; that he used pencil
because it was easier thus to initiate the
handwriting. and to show that no payments
| such as had been sworn to by the witness had
ever been made to Belford, Tyner or Turner.
He wanted to show that they could not have
been made by Dorsey. These statements had
been put in the Associated Press dispatches
and read by millions of people. He thought
it only fair that he be allowed to probe the
matter to the bottom; he desired to put wit
nesses on the stand to tell the truth.
Mr., Merrick said if the defense wished to
vindicate these gentlemen, they should pro-
| duce the check-book.
| Mr.. Davidge argued in favor of going into
the subject of memorandum.
The court said the paper had not been men
| toned during the examination in chief, and
therefore could not be touched upon in the
cross-examination. They could test the wit
ness memory on that subject and were
bound to accept his recollections as final.
TELLING THE STORY AGAIN.
The witness was required to go over the
story of the interview with Dorsey at Will
ards, but added nothing to his previous tes-
timony. Speaking of the reference to Tyner
and Turner, the witness said he desired to
correct his statement. His impression now
was that he did not show any memorandum
about Tyner and Turner, but told Woodward
of the charges against them. On the other
hand he may have shown the memorandum.
He did tell McGrew that money had been
| paid to Lilly and McGrew had told Wood
ward he would lose So, 900 year. and may
have mentioned his father-in-law, but did
not ask to have him provided for. Had told
| ex-senator Clayton of the steamboat routes
and the Jennings claim; he also said he
would like to get clerkship for his father-in-
| law. The witness told Clayton.
in speaking of what he would
lose by going over to the government,
that there was about $500 due him on ac-
count of the Jennings claim, and that he
| could not get that from Dorsey, as BosleI
was prosecuting his claim indirectly for Dor
sey, who had a large interest in it. The wit
ness knew when he went over to New York
to get the book for the Encouragement that
it was Dorsey's property.
Question-Did you expect to steal it?
| Objection was made and sustained, al
though Mr.. Ingersoll contended that it was
a clear case of larceny.
| The witness says he walked into the Office
and picked up the book in the presence OF
the bookkeeper That gentleman must have
seen him do this, because he stopped and
spoke to HIM (the bookkeeper), holding the
book under his arm in plain sight.
Mr. Ingersoll attempted to draw from the
witness statement that he told certain par
ties that he had shirt wrapped upin paper
which he palmed off on Postmaster-genera
James as the Dorsey book, but the witness
failed to remember any such conversation.
Adjourned till Monday.