The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1883-04-05

months, and fo- three Of those months...hi
been shut up IN dark room.
Question-"Can you sec 10 play bi
bards2"
Answer--"Oh, yes
Mr.. Merrick proceeded TO read the article
sentence by sentence. Witness correcte
several errors of the date; believed IL wa
true, as stated that Peck had been larg
mail contractor in 1873; during that yea
Peck was ut witnesses ranches to transac
business for Peck.
Mr.. Merrick produced proposal for tenn
porary service, dated December II, 1877.
Mr.. Ingersoll called the witness into tn
witness room and read the paper 10 him
Some discussion ensued as TO the prophet,
of witness leaving the stand in this way
but before it ended witness re
turned and said he believed he hat
not signed the paper for Peck the same wa,
true of the contract; he might have sgneC
them, however, ana forgotten the circum
stance. Boone's statement that the paper.
had been signed with Peck's name by Dor
sey was referred to witness, who said
Boone was mistaken; did not believe he had
signed the papers.
Question Don't you know it?"
Answer-"I don't know anything; be-
lieve good many things, but am not abso-
lutely certain about anything"
L y
not conspire to defraud the government,
are you"
A derisive smile was the only answer.
Mr.. Carpenter-"He wants an answer;
give it to him."
Mr.. Merrick-"C Certainly, l want an an
swer to all my questions" F."
Witness-"My recollection has been
pretty thoroughly refreshed on that sub
ject, and am as certain about that as / am
about anything"
Witness said he drew money on Peck's
routes and it was placed TO the credit OF his
account, but every cent was paid over to
Peck, after deducting amounts paid to sub
ontractors.
Mr. Merrick pushed the inquiry in re-
gard to this subject further by asking why
Peck who was out there near the routes,
had delegated to him Dorsey senator OF
the United States, the work of managing
them? Witness said he did not see why the
fact of his being senator should disqualify
him. Mr.. Merrick reminded witness of his
distance from the routes, but witness ad-
hered to his original statement. Witness
had no recollection of sending check to z.
G. Reynolds for $55S65; counsel might
the check had been offered in evidence.
Mr.. Merrick-"I didn't hear that offer.
You offered to create tribunal which the
court refused to organize
Witness did not know where John Dor.
sey was on July 18th, 1878.
A letter was produced, but witness had
no recollection of signing John Dorsey's
name to it. Mr.. Merrick endeavored to put
the paper in evidence in order to show
that under Peck s name witness had these
contracts. The fact that witness could not
see the paper was an obstacle
that could not be removed, and
the attempt failed. The court rendered an
opinion at some length upon this subject,
saying that that the genuineness of paper
had not been shown in any way, and where
evidence was lost by the death of a witness,
or, as in the present instance, by loss vi
eye-sight, the court would not permit of
expeGients to supply the place of evidence,
and knew OF no relief from the conse-
quences to the party affected.
Mr.. Merrick then offered in evidence con-
tracts purporting to be signed by Peck, 10
show Dorsey signed Peck's name. He
thought the same objection would not apply
in this case as in the case of the letter. Ar
gument was again made at length, and this
offer was also rejected.
Witness was next questioned at length in
regard 10 Miners movements during 1871
and 1873, but he did not recollect much
about them their relations, during that
time, were pleasant.
Mr.. Merricv rried to get witness to make
Miners whereabouts in December and jan
uary 1877 and 1878, but witness declined to
do so. When pressed, he would respond :
II don't think anything about the matter "
"How came Miner here in nJanuary 1875"
inquired Merrick?
ION the cars, presume cooliy replied
witness.
He also refused to say positively whether
or not he had written to Miner TO come
witness
house in Washington. and used
an office in his house where
he prepared his bids; witness pre-
sumed that he had recommended Miner to
Peck as man fitted in every way TO en-.
gage in the mail business; witness knew
Dorsey and Miner were at work together in
the office upon the bids might have seen
John Dorsey and Boone at work. but was
positive he (witness) had nothing to do with
the preparation OF bids; did not know
whether or not Peck did any of the work.
Mr.. Merrick inquired how 1t was this es-
tablishment was working under witness
root, and he knew nothing about it?
What did have TO do with it?'' angrily
replied witness.
am going to find out, retorted Mr.. Mer'
rick. "You had nothing to do with the
! businessW
Answer-"No, sir"
Question-"Why did you promise Boone
tnlrd interest.
Answer-"I did not; thought il could be
arranged -
Question-Why did you employ himW
Answer-"In accordance with letter
| from Peck or Dorsey"
Question-"What were the instructions
contained in these letters?"
Answer-"I don't remember
Qnesfion-"Did you tell Boone TO write
out west about the routesf'
Answer-"Yes."
| Question-"Why?"
Answer-"Because I was requested TO dc
so"
Question-"How, in letter?'
Answer-"Yes.'
Question-"I thought you did not re.
member the instructions in it3'
Ansger-"I don't remember anything
| else.i'
Judge wyiie sdjourned the court TIL to.
/ morrOW.