Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1883-03-27
DORSEY TAKES HIS OATH.
ANOTHER SCENE In THE FAR
CICAL BIELODRAMA.


Oath-COlOnel Ingerson Comes Tn His
Angry Clients Rescue with a Charac-
teristic Phihppic-RuIing of the Court.
WASHINGTON, March 26.-In the star
route trial to-day, after considerable time
had been spent upon number of unim-
portant witnesses, Stephen W. Dorsey
took the stand. The clerk was about to
administer the usual oath when Mr.. Mer-
rick rose and asked permission from the
court to question the witness regarding
his belief in its binding force. The re-
quest was granted, and Mr.. Merrick in
quired if the witness regarded an oath as
binding upon his conscience. He (tiercely
shaking his finger at Mr.. Merrick J
answered that an oath was as
binding upon him as upon Mr..
Merrick. He regarded it as binding
upon his con science. Mr.. Merrick asked
if, in taking his oath, the witness had in
mind the effect of failure to observe it
upon his future state OF reward and pun
Ishment. Instantly Colonel Ingersoll was
upon his feet. 81 object; sit down." said
he to Mr.. Dorsey, and then proceeded to
pour out an impassioned address.
He objected to the perpetuation of
this monstrOsity of the dark
age. The country has passed
that point. In nearly every Estate. i'm
every civilized State every man was al
lowed to testify whether he believed in
future punishment and a personal God or
not. There was one defendant in the
case. The government had taunted him
for year for not taking the stand, and
when he came here they sought to
prevent his testimony because he
hpIIaNl N Tah i
mitted that in many States a gentleman
could not testify; that Humboldt, who
knew more than all of the State, would
not have been allowed to testify if his
own brother had been murdered before
his eyes. So with Tyndall and with HuX-
ley. But in those States, said Colonel
Ingersoll, with extreme bitterness, the
man who beat his wife could go upon the
stand and testify. He did not believe
that His Honor would allow such pro-
cedure. The last time he had seen it
tried was before Judge Drummond at
Chicago, and the Judge said that the
examination concerned matters of this
world. The witness was to testify about
what he knew here.
Mr.. Merrick replied that the religion of
nineteen centuries needed 30 defense
from him. He was acting under the rules
of the law. He referred to Colonel Inger-
soll's charge that the government did not
wish Mr.. Dorsey to testify, and declared
that 1t was untrue. What he did
desire was that the court and the
jury might know what weight to
attach to his testimony when
he invoked the Supreme Being. Witnesses
were under obligations Of personal honor
and integrity, but in addition they had the
obligation that they had invoked the JUS
tice of heaven and the wrath of men if
they falsitied, and the court and jury
should have the witness opinion of
the weight of that obligation. He
wanted to know if, in taking an
oath, he felt that his conscience
was irI Olved and that there was an Obli-
CATION to tell the truth. He read from
Greenleaf in support of his position.
Colonel IngersOll said that if there was
another world and he had acted badly in
this he would expect to fale badly there,
and so he would expect to fare
well if he acted well here
He regarded the truth as the most sacred
of all obligations. If he was on the stand
and all he held most dear was at stake,
still would he be compelled to express his
belief, and say that he did not believe in
personal deity, and there were many eX-
cellent, generous people of that belief. In
the dark ages people were so given
to lying that nobody was expected to tell
the truth unless they were scared. The
gentleman Mr.. Merrick) had quoted the
law. The laws were not always right.
Many people believed many laws to be
wrong. As then, many laws were not
right. They had such laws under the old
inquisitiOn, with its thumbscrews and
racks and fires and other hideOus
mOnstrOsities. They had laws against
witches and wizards in the days when
they dug up babies cOrpses and made
ointment of them, and in some States
there were still laws that barred a man
from telling the truth because he did not
believe as some other man, or some holy
book, and this too after Darwin had lived
and died. There used to be a law to make
man catch poor negro woman with her
child in her arms and give her back to the
blOOdhOunds and the lash. He hoped that
the court would not entertain the PROPOSE
ton.
The court said that with men not in Of
fetal position it was a private matter as
to what they thought of the law. If they
undertook to violate it they were respOn-
sible, but the Judge was not at liberty to
say that he liked this law and disliked
that; that he would administer this one
and ignore that. They were not made by
the court, and it could only apply them.
AS to the logical question discussed at
such length, the court would not
90 into that. 1t was unnecessary.
The act of March 16, 1873, made
the defendant witness, and that settled
that point. Then the only question of COM
potency was whether Mr.. Dorsey was q
defendant when the new law was intro
.duced and without limitation said that
defendant shall be a witness. No other
competency was required. On the other
view the court would not pass upon. 1t
would not go into the logical view nor
beyond the law of 1878.
Mr.. Merrick inquired the necessity Of
swearing the witness under this view.
The court replied-So that he may be
punished for perjury if he does not tell the
truth.
Mr.. Merrick acknowledged that the an
swer was sufficient. He then went on to
disavow any intention of preventing the
witness from testifying. The government
was desirous that he should testify.
The cOurt-Administe the oath.
Col. IngersOll-He may swear or affirm.
The witness-Oh, l had just as soon
swear.
The oath was then administered and
Col. IngersOll began the direct eXamina-
ton. The witness was visibly agitated,
and i'm several instances scarcely waited
for the conclusion of the question before
answering. He testified that he became
acquainted with sub-cOntractor Miner
in 1866 or 1867, at Sandusky, Ohio.
He had known sub-contractOr Peck
for fifteen years at the time of his
death. 1t was business relation at first,
Mr.. Peck being Secretary and the witness
Treasurer of arailrOad company. Mr.. Peck
subsequently married a sister of the wit
ness wife, and died in August, 1891. He
first saw sub-cOntractOr Vale in the
spring of 1878, but did not make his ac-
Quaintance at that time. John w. Dorsey
is his brother. He knew sub-cOntractor
Boone in 1874, while he was post office
clerk. He first met eX-POstmaster Gen.
eral Brady at the Cincinnati Convention
i'm 1875, and John IL. Watts in New Mex
leo in 1876 or 1877.
Col. IngersOll-Did you ever enter into
an agreement with Gen. Brady, John Dor
sey, Mr.. Vale, Mr.. Miner, or any or either
of them to detraud the government by
bidding for mail cOntractss
The witness, passiOnately-I never en-
tered into such an agreement with any
body at any place or at any time.
Col. IngersOll-Did you ever cOnspire
with them to defraud the government?
Mr.. DOrsey-I never entered into a con-
spiracy with them of any kind.
Col. 1ngersOll-Did you ever pay money
to Gen. Brady to influence his official
actions?
The witness. eXcitedly-l never had a
transaction with Gen, Brady to the eX-
tent of one cent in my life, ! never paid
him a cent OF promised to pay him cent
for possible purpose,
Colonel lngeFsoll cautioned the Wit
ness not TO answer before the other side
hadTansOppOrtunity TO object.
Colonel IngersOll-Did you ever give
any directions to sub-cOntractOr Rerdell,
either verbally or in writing. to open an