The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1883-03-22

orders, he said, we're made at the pro raj
and seven mt less than the pro rata; witneI
meant that expedition, and not increasl
was allowed at less than the pro rati
gauged by the contractors affidavit.
Witness did not know there had bee
two aflidavits upon one Of the routes and s
had no explanation TO offer in relation 3
the instance cited by Bliss, where an aft
davt most favorable to the contractor ha
been accepted. Bliss then took up the re
port OF the proceedings of the congressiona
committe, and asked witness il his state
ments then made were true. He ASSERTED
they were; he said If it was necessary Il
expedite route, and a contractor insisted
upon the pro rata compensation, it woulC
be necessary 20 allow it or continue the ser
vice on the old schedule. Bliss inquired
what would be done If the figure was toe
high under his rule.
Answer--"We would sny, old fellow, you
will have to come down and make another
propositions; meanwhile We would continue
the old service"
Some discussion took place in relation to
this point, Bliss contending that a con-
tractor could be forced to carry the mail
upon the basis of the actual number OF men
and animals used, regardless of the con-
tractors affidavit. Witness presumed the
congressional investiFs f1SS0 had been
| brought on by his request Tor deficiency
appropriation of $2,000,000. He was asked
| If he did not say he had spent So, 500, 900 of
the total appropriation cf S5,9O0,000 for
1879 before the 1st of January, 1879.
| Answer--"l do not remember; Of course
official papers would show
| Did not know how many orders for expe-
dition he made while second assistant.
There were numbers OF them, over 100; but
the postmaster-general made some, proba-
bly, in the number; witness made more
orders, but the postmastergen made
orders for larger amounts.
Blss-"Don't you know you made ten
times the number of orders made by your
predecessors Rault and Tyner?'
Answer" Oh! / presume l did. l
thought myself ten times better an assist
ant postmaster-general than they were to-
gether. [Laughter.l Tyner and Jewell did
little in expediting. 1t was not part OF
JEWELS policy to increase gstar.routes on
steamboat service"
"You spoke of congress- approving your
acts, where do you find that"
Answer regard granting the def
cheney appropriation as approval"
"Was that the only basis?'
-(sharply)-"That was enough"
Question-"Did they give you all you
askedP"
Answer-"No; but they gave enough"
Questiou-"Then you asked for more
than you needed?''
Answer-"Yes for more than enough to
make up the deficiency"
Witness did not take any notice of the
sub-contractors, as rule.
"Did you not say to William Lyley, in
August, 1880. that if the sub-contract on
the Mineral Park route was given to GER
tain person named you would cut the ser
vice down to one trip a weekp
Ingersoll-"I object; name the person"
The Court-"Yes; that must be DONE"
Bliss-"One jennings"
Ingersoll-"I object again"
Merrick argued that witness must answer
any and every question, and cited Massa-
chusetts case as authority.
The court said when the defendant went
upon The stand he was protected in same
degree as other Witness, and the same
thing was true of cross ss-examination, but
the question might be asked. 1t depended
upon the nature of the answer whether or
nat it could be rebutted.
The question was again put, and witness
answered he did not remeplbeg having lad
g,rv such conversations. He had felt like
saving such things about Jennings,
because he rendered such mis-
Eontractol James 7. Frce. BLISS prouuSeu
one of Prices draftsand asked II witness uIi nan
over had the paper in his possession, WI
oh =
son .yed the paper. Merrick expressed
e1aii,, ~ ii;,n,tention of showing that these two
ars ~ far 81 2G0 each, and 1000 in money
,inI ~ hoon nlaced on Brady's desk, whlle ne
iIaI na aot;,, os second assistant postmaster
was noI aoie bv the contractors on thls
ronte for corrupt purpose. ne
nronosed to show that anoteer St
xiii for $500 from paniel u murPny PnS hcon Sy
= III, n,,iS 80 %navable to Murphy's order, hau peeh
LOUIS, - Hpradv for a similar corrupt purpose.
sgnS gn Swyanted W 10 show that they had direct
rafot III tion IN expedition and putting OF ser
LelaU.o ena 10 oortain routes. He argued IL was
WY ,atont o1t matter for either direct or cross
oon oar,inotion. The government expected
70 show The Jury corrupt mouves9n Drnuy
nert said Merrick, and he clted au'hoti
lties to show it was PioPe; s;roiler
investigate these mos,rr1 muorrnntion. the same
ororc;ss of duties, the same manipulaIiolIs
eaeiJ es obeysed in the indictment here, was
as SSa &C 1bo corrupt motives OF the man.
ppo,,Jd Il moi Justly be inferred he had uone
az same with regard to routes as set 9us "
in the Indictment The court .qo .inqulien ;s
Werricr believed it made no ulleienoe ii'aii' -
the conspiracy was charged IN 5vlse'"l W
certain designated routes routes lHSs aS, gen
." n'ada no difference. They would
show he dragged his white robes OF ounce IN
o" the cntter at Bidding and for pay Of other
,,,o,, In reference to other routes, and that,
tno at the same time the operations
| cberoed in the Indictment were progressing
They wanted to have II out OF MS moutn,
so they might rebut him. Inc wltneTSes TSs
were here prepared iStaITTnied i0T tes and asked
! n Merrick held that il the iact
,rere moved. as he proposed, that be nould
| obIige the defendant to criminate hinhsell !;
We,ri,Ir contended he could, and read
fiyther from the authorities in support OF
his nroposition. Having voluntarily gone
m The stand, defendant must run Ine
chances of eliminating himself, ano II va
nlain that the law did not contemplate
eo~co When such witnesses were al.
ior1ed 10 testify. II they shoVen
.I,at sbout the same time be was steeped
tr vilIainv. was Il not competent evidence.
m,ying tbe delivery Of Merriek's arguments;
,yhich occupied about half an hour, and
we're characterized by bitterness ano
scathing comments upon brady' Ine la..si ~,
sst with the greatest composure IN the VII
ness'box' looking him calmly in the lace
Without hearing argument on the part
the defense, court adjourned thl Monosy
eRArS BATA.
, The Investigation OF the receipts ana dls
.~;h1tion of corn and wheat TO March lst
| re hsen completed BY the department Q
sgricuiture. II makes the stock OF corr q
hand Al that date about 55O,OOO,OOO 1nsneis
- as rer cent. OF last years crop. OF this
Sao 40 600 bushels are in the states OF N
, cortr-l basin and north Tennessee, an
ies 90 900 bushels in the middl
, .i.,.. In co.nparison with the ay
srage stock Of the past i've year
: al the same date there IL scarcely any n
D crease IN The western or middle states;
! ~. .orth tbe nerrentage Of crop remaintnl
: !. "a f1sfead al 38 Taking all the state
- .zetber the increased stock is about pe
mt The seven surplus corn states. iroL
e - ohio west 70 Eebraska and kansas, u
r cinsive. had 50 per cent. Of the crop Q
2 hand. against q per cent "a
e March. and 80 per cent o. ne crop % q ,. -,
. - ~ihen sfocks were 4l5 Wo.uD nusnel