National Republican., 1883-02-22

Inc criminal court reSuine1 Jne nearing OF
the star route trial yesterday morning. The
court refused to admit in evidence the mus
ter roll offered on Tuesday. Rerdell again
took the stand, and said that DOrseys in
structions regarding the filing in of the
blanks on the papers were specific In every
case, except those on tho Toguevillo-Adair-
vile route. number of papers were then
identified. The witness said he had con-
versation with Miner in 1878, after his return
from the west, in which Miner told him he
had arranged with Moore to look out for his
routes.
Mr. Merrick stated that he should perhaps
recall the witness to further examine him ON
certain papers not yet in his possession
otherwise he had concluded.
George HaycOck, formerly postmaster at
Pine Bluffs, Ark, testified to receiving bum
die of blank proposals from Dorsey, with
request that they be certified. Alter some
preliminary discussion, Mr.. Ingorsoli began
the cross-eXaminaton OF Rerdell lie denied
that he had received money or consideration
of any kind for making his affidavit.
Mr.. Ingersoll questioned the witness Us TO
his statements made before the congressional
investigating committee. Witness did not
keep the books (the jOuanal and iedgerl after
August, 1879 That work was done by air.
Donnelly, Dorsey's bOOkkeeper. The dinen-
sions of the books were given by witness. He
had purchased the books, but believed ne had
been reimbursed Tor the money thus expended.
Still, he regarded the books US being has per-
sonal property. Witness was asked what he
intended to swear about the false books he
prepared for the committee. Objection by the
prOsecution.l
MIR. Ingersoll argued that II the witness was
ready TO swear to fasehOod then, he was
equally ready to do it now. The objection
was sustained by the court.
The witness identified paper presented I'd
him by Mr.. IngersOll as being in his hand
writing, except the words and Others" Had
signed and sworn to it.
Mr.. Ingersoll then read the paper in evil
dence. 1t was an affidavit by Rerdell, dated
July 10, 1882 1t recites that whereas certain
false and wicked rumOrs have been circulated
and gained credit that he lRerdell) had
made statements to certain persons regarding
S. w. Dorsey, j. w. BOsler, and Brady, repre-
Benting that they had engaged in corrupt
and fraudulent combination to defraud the
people in connection with the mail service,
therefore he declares that he has had control
Of their mail routes for the past three years,
and never, by verbal or written direction or
influence, had wrong been done on their
part or his own. So far as he knew
there was never an improper act or suggestion
made by Dorsey or Bosler to him. The state
ment that he (Rerdell) had books and papers
showing that they had been engaged i'll
scheme to defraud the people was false, and
no such books or papers ever existed there
was no truth in the charge. The statement
that Dorsey and Bosler paid so per cent. of
their remitted fines, or any percentage to
Brady was apure fabrication. He AYERS that
- he has no knowledge that Dorsey or Bosler
ever secured an increase of service by cor
rupt means. He had given them all Of the
information they possessed about their routes
for which he was agent. No man ever paid
Brady to his knowledge. The whole thing
.l..l
purposes. In short, all stories told Of uniaw-
full and improper operations on the part Of
Dorsey and Bosler were malicious fabrica-
tions and this statement was made volun-
tarily to vindicate them.
The witness said he desired to explain the
circumstances under which the affidavit was
made. A few days before its date-July 13-
he had notified Dorsey that he intended to
20 over to the government and make II full
statement. On July IL Dorsey called him
into Willard's hotel and threatened to pros
ecute him for perjury if he did this. Dorsey
also produced two letters that he (Rerdell) had
been foolish enough to write to woman in
this city, and said he would break up his fam
lily relations if he did not make this affidavit.
Witness was very much frightened, for he
thought these letters had been destroyed as
Dorsey had promised. Dorsey remarked that
he was not fool enough to do that; he pre-
ferred to keep them. Yielding to these
threats witness consented to make the affidavit.
Dorsey sat down and wrote every word of it
with pencil. Witness copied it off on the
day following (July 13) in his office in the
Corcoran building. He had it witnessed by
N. Callan, notary public, and carried il to
Dorsey and Bosler at Wizards hotel Wit
ness acknowledged that the affidavit was
false in every essential statement. 1t was
true wherein it stated that he had never seen
Dorsey or Bosler pay Brady for remissions.
After recess witness said that when he
Ia hat wit ha nnt nj hat ba
had done legal wrong in fixing up the petit
tions He knew that the statement was sub
stantially untrue. Had talked with Bosler
and his two friends-O'Neil and Colgate
during the recess 1t did not follow that be-
cause he did not think it was legally wrong
to fix up petitions that he regarded it as
legally right. Never reasoned out the dis
tinction, but did just as he was instructed
Judge Wylie said some writer on morals
would have to reason out the distinction.
Mr.. Ingersoll said he would like to ask tho
witness If he was evidently man of morals,
Mr. Ingersoll proceeded to go through the
affidavit by piecemeal. Ho read, "The verbal
and written directions | received from each
and both of them in the conduct of the bust
ness, never by influence or otherwise implied
wrOngdong on their part or mine"
Witness acknowledged that this was false.
At that time he entertained an inference re-
garding the entries to Smiths account and
to the account Of Sam Jones'"
Any other transactionp inquired Mr..
1ngersoll.
A. Yes, sir; there was an entry to the nc
count of James b. Belford, member of con-
gress.
Mr.. Ingersoll How much2
A. Ii was from his check book, an entry of
5000 to the credit Of Mr. Belford. 1t was to
be charged TO mail accounts, That was in
the summer of 1879. The check was drawn
ON the bank of Middleton & Co.
Witness did not recolleGt to whose order it
was drawn.
Mr. Ingersoll asked what was written on
the stub.
Mr. MerriclS objected to the question unless
the defense produced the books. Argument
followed at some length. Mr.. Merrick said
he would smoke out the books OF cause infer.
ences to be drawn very damaging to the other
side.
Mr.. Ingersoll What terrific thing that
Inference" will be.
The court finally decided that the defense
might cross examine upon the point, but that
they could not afterward attempt to contra
dict the witness by producing the paper. The
court was bound to assume that the defense
possessed the book from their own state
ment that they would not assist the prosecu-
tiOn by producing them.
Mr.. lngersoll replied that it was the duty
of an attorney to keep from the witness tho
knowledge that he did not possess certain
books. In that way he was forced to give
care to his statements regarding their con-
tents.