The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-03-16

Peck, in New Mexico, in January, 1879, six
months before the orders were made, and
asked why Peck had made the same allow
ance as the witness?
Answer-That question you will have to
ask Peck; you will have to go and see him.
Substantially the same questions were
asked in regard to a similar affidavit on the
Juiian-Cotton route, where an affidavit ap-
peared to have been prepared several months
in advance of the orders
The court remarked that it was not neces-
sary to investigate Peck on that; he could
cot have known what the orders would be.
Except by collusion," answered Mr..
Bliss. while the defense laughed satirically.
why don't you ask him whether he was
in collusion with Peck?' inquired Mr.. Inger-
soil.
Mr. Bliss-You can ask him yourself.
Mr.. Bliss then appealed to the court to
stop the running comments of counsel on
the other side. On more than one occasion,
while this witness had been under examina-
ton, his answers had been guided by sug-
gestions from that source.
Mr. Ingersoll-It could not have been from
better source
The witness INDIGNANTLY say that is
not true
A question having arisen in regard to the
scope of the cross-examination, Mr.. Merrick
expressed his understanding that it was not
confined to the limits, but that when the de-
fendant went upon the stand he threw him
self open SO far as the whole case was con-
cerned.
The court concurred in that view.
THE LIMIT OF COMPENSATION.
The witness was asked if he had not al
lowed compensation up to the limits fixed by
the afidavits in each of the nineteen routes.
He answered that all were expedited at less
than pro rata
The Court-You don't include the Bis
marck-Tongue river route?
Answer-Tes, sir; that was expedited at
less than pro rata.
Mr.. Bliss-He means a pro rata based on
Miners 150-men affidavit.
Mr.. Ingersoll-Hemeans the affidavit laid
before him for action.
The Court-That affidavit contemplated q
fight with Indians, 1 suppose.
Mr. Bliss inquired if the witness thought
that one man was required for every ten
miles of routeP He answered that as it was
a new route, running through the bad
lands of Dakota, and infested
with hostile Indians he did
not think it was too many; still, while they
| acted upon the affidavit they did not make
the expedition on that basis. He was asked
how far the schedule would require a horse
to travel per day.
Objection was made and sustained.
That is like the story of the Irishman
who asked how far it was to town." began
Mr.. Ingersoll.
court; IAN Irishman always is" Laugh ter
Mr.. Bliss asked how it was that rejected
atiidavit and an offer to carry the mail for
less than pro rata had been received the same
day?
The witness said they might have been re-
ceived at different hours his recollection on
that point was not distinct
The witness was asked if he knew of any
way to regulate expedition better than that
CT using contractors affidavits. He answered
that, as general rule, there was no better
way.
Mr.. Bliss-Even where the contractor has
had no experience?
Answer-You don't expect me to answer
that question?
~. 5iiss--Why not9
Answer-It is so ridiculous.
The witness went on to say that he re-
garded contractors as honest men, and did
not care a snap of his finger whether they
had experience or not and there was no bet
ter rule, he added. Adjourned.