National Republican., 1883-04-03


security had been required from Rerdell. !
Possibly witness had employed John l.. An |
derson to take charge of the business during
Rerdelps absence in 1S75 1t was the most
natural thing in the world for him to have
done so during the absence of the members of
the firm. Witness had done everything he
could to have the service lawfully and prop
erly increased where it was deserved.
RerdelPs letters of introduction to Gov
Routt and Capt Paddock, of Colorado, were
read by Mr.. Merrick. Mr.. Ingersoll wished
to give his judgment upon the handwriting,
ascertaining that NJ g. Rerdell" had been
written in different hand The court re-
fused to allow this procedure, and waving
his hand, the witness said nonchalantly, II
will assume that wrote them"
81 don't think am half so smart as the
witness" said Mr.. 1ngersoll.
g don't think so either" said the court
drily, amidst general laughter, which Mr.
Ingersoll bore with good humor.
The letters represent Rerdell as q man of
irreproachable character. Mr.. Merrick in-
qutried If these statements were true.
=" In the light of present events?" sarcastic
cally queried the witness.
In the light of the events of April, 1879"
returned Mr. Merrick.
"Oh | suppose so," answered the witness.
Mr.. Merrick referred to the statements in one
of the letters, to the effect that Rerdell and
The court did not believe that person
should be held to strict accountability for
the statements in n letter of introduction.
"We are willing to admit that the letter is
not true" interposed Mr. Ingersoll.
Mr.. Merrick believed that the letters should
be taken into account when connected with
other evidence.
The witness described at some length the
circumstances attending the distribution of
the route when he assumed an active interest
| in the business Subcontracts were given to
Miner by Peck and Dorsey, and all the routes
| witness received from Miner were given by
subcontractors to witness or Rerdell. AS
signments of postal drafts were also made.
| Witness employed Rerdell to look after his
routes. After that witness did everything he
could lawfully and properly do to have such
services increased as deserved it, and if he had
neglected anything to that end ho did not
| know it,
Witness understood that the basis for ex-
pedition, according to the departmental regu-
lations, was tho aflidavits.
Witness did not remember that lot of blank
aflidavits had been divided up among the con-
tractors; presumed that there was some sort
of arrangement by which the nominal con-
tractor upon transferred route should
furnish an affidavit when necessary. Up to
the 9th of June, 1879, witness had very little
to do with the business; the whole thing was
III heruellS MINUS Az JnaJ Ullne, sara tnc
witness earnestly, :" / had no more to do with
it than you had, Mr.. Merrick, nor did care
three straws for them" the contractorsl.
He was asked why John Dorsey had given
an affidavit in connection with one of his
| (witnessD routes on April 20, 1879. He said
he believed that the regulations required an
affidavit from the contractor of record, and
in this case John Dorsey was the contractor.
Witness had no recollection of filling in one
of these aflidavits shown by Mr.. Mcrrick. He
had gotten all the expedition he could An
other affidavit was shown. The witness did
not know whether or not he filled it up.
There is another party who writes u hand
like mine," said he.
"Do you refer to w. +. Kellogg ?" inquired
Mr.. Merrick, quickly. (Referring to Dorsey's
clerk.)
The witness was not aware that he (Kel-
logg) had testified to anything Of that kind,
and was referred to the record.
hhe orders for increase of expedition upon
the witnesss routes were then taken up, and
he was asked If he recollected them. In the
ma ajority of cases he recollected the orders,
but declared that he was not in the city at the
| time. He had never drawn cent from the
government on account of these routes; dur
| ing two quarters had discounted the drafts
| through banks, which secured the money.
Mr.. Merrick inquired if the witness did not
recollect that within few months Of his as
suming charge Of the business the receipts
from the routes had been increased by
| $l01 246.35 per annum. Council objected to
the question. The court said that the fact
could neither be proved nor disproved by
the witness's recollection. Mr.. Merrick
thought it was hardly probable that man
could have no recollection of such large in
crease in his income. The witness said that
he remembered the increased receipts gener-
ally, but not the specific sums.
Nyao o mi lo IN Sunnnse hot ba 20
were large. The Mineral Park-Pioch route
showed an apparent profit of $4,000 per
annum, but it had been sold for q small sum,
| because it was an actual loss from the heavy
fines and deductions-$300 900 that remained
yet unpaid. Mr.. Merrick wished to know if
the witness meant to say that the contractors
paid the fines for which the subcontractors
were responsible.
He answered that they did in many cases.
Witness only drew pay for the service during
| two quarters, and Boser drew the pay for tho
quarters ending Dec. 81, 1879, and thereafter.
While on the subject of the route from Tan
querville to Adairville, the witness said that
Rerdell had an interest in it, and was paid
$4,000 per annum:
| Question To attend 10 your business?
| Answer. He ought to have SO done,
4. No, sir he stole nearly s5 900 a. 9OO believe
on that very route
q. When7
4. About year and half ago.
| q. Who from.
| 4. Bosler and myself.
| q. How?
A. There were subcontracts given to him for the
entire pay. Bosler held drafts for the entire pay
and was 10 pay the subcontractors Rerdell Went
| to Bosler.
The prosecution objected to the recital OF
facts not within the witnesses personal knowl-
edge.
The court said that the matter was neither
pertinent nor collateral, although called by
| the prosecution.
Mr.. Bliss undertook to say that the state.
ment was untrue.
Mr. Ingersoll offered to provo that it was
| true.
The witness said that he ought to know
something about it when he had paid the
money himself.
But the court refused to permit a further
| answer.
The witness said that Bosler went into the
business to advance money. When witness
left this city in June, 1879, he had no inten.
tion Of returning. Supposed that he had in
formed BOsler rs TO the nature of the business,
but have no recollection of having state.
ment made for that purpose, or of having
directed Rerdell to show the books to BOsler
Probably saw Boser in this city or New York
and told him about the business.
Mr. Merrick asked if he could then remem-
Der enough of the details to satisfy Bosler
The witness supposed that he could then
there was a statement of the number of the
routes, their pay, and other details pasted
upon the corner Of RerdelPs desk perhaps
that had been referred to. Bosler was to ad-