The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-02-22

made in the summer of 1879 The check
was drawn on Middleton & Co., bankers of
this city.
A RULING AGAINST THE DEFENSE.
The witness did not recollect to whose Or
der il was drawn.
Mr.. Ingersoll asked what was written on
the stub.
Mr.. Merrick objected to the question unless
the defense produced the book.
Argument followed at some length. The
Court said he would assume that the defense
possessed the books. 1t was claimed they
| contained proof of the guilt of the defend
ants. They had been kept by Dorsey's direc-
ton. so he furnished the evidence. OF
course there could be no claim upon him for
their production, but when the defense cross
examined witness upon the contents of that
stub-book with the object of testing his
memory, they were bound by his answers,
and could not use book to contradict him.
The book was forever out of the case.
Mr.. Ingersoll asked to be informed as to
| the extent to which he had been affected by
the answers already given. He had never
known of that check Belford didn't know
what the check had been given for.
The Court said the answer should be elimi-
mated from the record. 1t was not responsive
to the question.
Mr.. Merrick maintained that the answer
was responsive.
Mr.. Ingersoll gave notice that he would go
into the subject later on. He intended to re-
| lieve Belford from any injurious inference
that might be drawn.
The Court regarded the subject as entirely
outside the case, and directed that all refer
ence to it be stricken out.
| Mr.. Ingersoll then resumed the cross-ex-
animation. He read from affidavit: 'The
statement that s. w. Dorsey and J. w. Bos-
Ter paid Brady so or any other per cent. was
pure fabrication"
| The witness said it was not pure fabrca-
! ton, for he inferred that such was the case.
| Mr.. Ingersoll-Then the statement that it
was pure fabrication is a falsehood?
| Answer-Yes; that affidavit generally was
falsehood
| Mr.. Ingersoll continued to read passages
from the affidavit, the witness steadfastly de-
| nying their truthfulness. He said he never
saw any money paid to Brady on Dorsey's
statements. He did not demand those let
ters from Dorsey when he made the affida-
| Wits. Eight or nine months before that occa-
| sion Dorsey told him he had destroyed the
letters consequently he was astonished and
overwhelmed when they were produced
Mr.. Ingersoll-You say this was on July
! 18th last? Answer-Yes, sir.
! Question-Did you tell Charles Thompson,
on the second day you lay in Jail after the
verdict, that Dorsey had shown you the let
tiers year before and that you were per-
fectly astonished. You thought they had
/ been destroyed? Answer-No, sir; told him
Dorsey come down to the Jail and threatened
me with those letters.
| Adjourned until Friday.
AN EMPHATIC DENIAL BY Mr.. BELFoRD
Congressman Beford upon being ques-
| toned this evening concerning the testimony
given in the star-route trial to-day to the eff
feet that check for $1,000 had been drawn
in his name by S. w. Dorsey, replied in the
most emphatic manner as follows: ~
never had any dealings of a financial
character public or private, with Sem
ator Dorsey in my life to the amount
of single cent If any check was drawn in
my name, never saw and never heard of it
until my attention was called to the state
ment in the Star this evening. If check
| was drawn in my name it must have been
presented and paid TO some other party, if
/ paid at all. This evening 1 went to Colonel
IngersolPs house for the purpose of request
| ing him to call me to the stand and give me
an opportunity to declare under oath that
the evidence given to-day, in every partcu-
| lar, in So far as it seeks to involve me in
this star-route business, is false. l propose
that this opportunity shall be given me be-
| fore the trial closes.