Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-03-28
STAR ROUTES.
CONTINUATION OF THE EXAMINA-
TTON OF EX-SENATOR DORSEY.
Some Lively Passages Between Counsel
Indictments Against Senator kellogg for
Perjury and Against Brady for Bribery
Returned Into Court.

asked if he knew whether he had drawn
any check for $1,000 upon Middleton &
Co., in June, 1879, as described by Reerdel.
He said ne did not draw check for that
amount but did draw check for $500
upon June q or %. 1t was given to Reer-
del. The check was shown and identified.
Witness did not draw the money on the
check.
= The court did not believe this was the
check referred 10 by Reerdel.
lngersoll argued that 1t was the check,
and declared Reerdel had forgotten the
amount and the fact that he endorsed it
and drew the money. He proposed &C.
counting for every check drawn on Dorsey
on Middleton's bank. He asked leave TO
read the check to the jury.
Merrick maintained that it was not the
check referred to. Ingersoll had called
Reerdel the pillar of the prosecution.
That was not so. If all his testimony were
blotted out there would remain enough
evidence to make out the case. The pillar
of the prosecution was all the evidence,
and not until they had pulled down all of
it would the structure be shaken.
Ingersoll promised to produce every
check, every one, and to account for every
dollar. Let the prose cution consult with
their witness, Reerdel, who was assisting
them, and then let them specify the par
ticular check, and he would trace the
money.
Merrick-Why did you not produce the
stub books?
Ingersoll-You may get more stub books
than yoa want.
Afthr adjournment the court refused to
| allow the check to be put in evidence.
Wilson moved to strike out, so far as
Brady was concerned, all that Reerdel had
said about Dorsey's drawing money from
Middleton's bank, being at the Citizens
bank, and going to Brady's room.
The court refused to entertain till all the
checks had been offered.
Examination was then resumed.
Witness said that while it was possible
he had gone with Reerdel on June 81, to
draw money from MiddIeton's, he did not
believe he had. Did not go to the post
Office and into Brady's room, as described
| by Reerdsl. Did not pay any money to
Brady on that or any other occasion. Did
not draw check on Middleton & Co. for
| $500 in June.
Ingersoll asked if any of them adde
together would aggregate to that
amount
| Witness said he could not see, and could
only report what his clerks told him after
a careful examination of the checks.
Probably for three or four days in June
Reerdsl had access to the witness check
book.
| Ingersoll referred to Resrders statement
of the contents of the letter from Dorsey
| TO Bosler inviting Bosler to assume an in
tsrsst inithe business, setting out the fnan-
cial state of the business and including the
account of Indebtedness to T. J. B.
Witness said there was not grain OF
truth in the story. He had never written
such letter to anybody in the world and
never said that anything was to be paid to
7. j. B., or any postofice official.
Ingersoll then referred to Reerdel's
statement that the papers had been taken
from his Office while he was in Jail.
Witness said he had only entered thai
Office twice and Reerdel was there upo1
both occasions. The last time it was upon
Reerdel's invitation. After his release from
Jail, Reerdel was closing up his office anG
took to witness house and left the house
and left them there. Tha. bundle was still
untouched and Unopened at his house. Wit
ness never had key to that Office and did
not enter it while Reerdel was in Jail.
Rserdel's statement of the conversation
at Wizards hotel, July II, 1882, when he
was locked in and ordered to make
another affidavit, was taken up.
1 HIT ~ ha ,o,I
during the last trial, Resrdel attempted to
blackmail Bosler.
The statement was ruled out by the
court.
| Witness said he went to Bosler's room al
| Wizards and found Reerdel there with
Bosler. He was protesting to Bosler that
the allegations as to what ne (ReerdeD had
been doing, were untrue.
The grand jury came into court this
afternoon and returned indictments
against Thomas J. Brady for corrupt Off
cial action in connection with the two Price
routes, one against VIM. Pitt Kellogg for
unlawfully receiving money from Price
in consideration of corruptly influencing
the action of Brady in regard to Prices
mail route. and one against Thomas J.
Brady and VIM. Pitt Kellogg for cOnspir-
4
A recess was taken at this point. After
recess the grand jury came into the court
with number of presentments, among
them the following:
United States VS.. Thomas J. Brady, for
unlawfully receiving money and post
drafts of $4,000 from James B. Price, as
reward for making contract for mail
service with Price on July Is, 1880, upon
the star route from Socorro to Silver City,
New Mexico.
| Against VIM. Pitt Kellogg and Thomas
j. Brady for conspiracy on April II, 1880,
with James B. Price to defraud the United
| States by means of false oaths and fraud
ulent allowance for expedition and false
fraudulent claims to be made for increased
pay for expedition on post routes from
Munroe to Shreveport in Louisiana, and
San Antonio to Corpus Christi in Texas,
the said routes then being in the name of
Jas. B. Price, contractor.
Against VIM. Pitt Kellogg, for setting
forth that on April IL, 1880, whilst seua-
tor from Louisiana, he did unlawfully re-
ceive from Jas. B. Price, contractor on the
post routes from Munroe to Shreveport,
La, and San Antonio to Corpus Christi,
Texas, certain sum of money, postoffice
l-uc 4