The Indianapolis journal., 1883-03-08
A Stubborn Contest Over the Admission of
His Testimony Concerning the Check
Mentioned in Rerdel's Evidence.
The Congressman Offends the Court
and Is Fined for Contempt.
a Card from Stephen W. Dorsey Emphat-
icaly Exonerating Mr.. Belford
and Denouncing Rerdell.


trial was resumed this morning. Mr.. Inger-
soil began the case for the defense by calling
Hon. James B. Belford, of Colorado, to the
witness stand. He said he had represented
that State in Congress since it had been ad-
mitted to the Union; had travelled over nearly
the whole of the State, and was acquainted
with its growth and development. The wit
ness identified his signature to a petition
upon one of the Colorado routes.
Mr.. Ingersoll was about to show that Mr..
Belford had frequently called at the Post
office Department and sought to have the
mail facilities of his State increased; in
other words, that the influence came from
Colorado.
Mr.. Merrick objected because the proposed
inquiry applied to the whole State, instead
of a single route. If they went into this
evidence, the prosecution would call upon
Mr.. Hill to prove that he had been solicited
by Mr.. Belford to cooperate with him in Sc
curing increased mail service, and that he
had declined.
Mr.. Ingersoll insisted that it was proper to
show upon what representations and inhu-
ence the increase had been made The GRIM
inal law provided that if any lawful justif-
cation could be shown for alleged criminal
action it must be assumed to be the motive
that led to the action. They would show
that the witness called frequently at the
department and urged and demanded an in
crease of mail facilities,
The court said it would allow the defense
to show that the witness had used his nfu-
ence with the department, but it would not
go into any question of the general policy of
the department.
The examination was then resumed The
witness said he had called many times, pos
sibly one hundred times, at the Postoffice
Department, 10 urge upon the Second Assist
ant Postmaster-genefal Multiplication of
mail services. From the magnitude of his
business he could not remember a visit in
connection with any particular route The
witness was asked to state what he said to
Brady regarding the needs of Colorado.
The prosecution objected that this was
touching upon the policy of the department
The court said it was not the policy of the
department, but the needs of the country
which are now proposed TO be shown.
The witness then said he had impressed
upon Brady the rapid growth and needs of
State; he instanced the Silverton route
through the San Juan country-and also
Leadville. In this town, several years ago,
ne had found it impossible to walk down the
street. The mail comprised 120 letters, but
there were 40, 900 or $4,000 people there now
There was Fort Collins; he was there when
six houses composed the town. When he
thara tho Ath 40 ba ao,,1J bor E,1
his way through the town.
II object" said Mr.. Merrick. ''Is that
competent Your Honor? He is saying that
he told Brady that, when it only happened
the other day"
The objection was sustained, but the court
decided to allow the witness to prove the
growth of the country The witness went on
to instance many fourishing towns and
cities in Colorado that had sprung up within
the past few years.
Mr.. Merrick objected because of the time
referred to. but the court held it was proper
evidence, for it might 90 to show that Brady
foresaw the future development OF the coun-
try
The witness, continuing, said he came here
to look after the interests of his constituents,
TO carry out their requests and if they asked
him to do the same thing again, he would.
QUESTION OF MONEY.
Mr.. Ingersoll-Did you ever receive money,
or check for money, from s. W. Dorsey or
any of these defendants, in connection with
mail businessP
Mr.. Merrick-I object.
The Court (promptly)-The objection is
sustained.
Mr.. Ingersoll desired to be heard on the
subject.
Mr.. Merrick reminded the court that the
entire matter inadvertently referred to by a
witness (RerdelD had been stricken out of
the record.
Mr.. Carpenter-outof the record, but not
out of the press.
Mr.. Ingersoll called the attention of the
court to what Rerdell had said about stubs
of checks marked Mail" There were four
of them. He had sent one of them to Smith,
one to Jones, one to James B. Beiford and
one to anybody else-it did not matter
whom Now, if one of them was marked
Thomas j. Brady" it would be a
material point Rerdell had said that
he saw this check; that was equally
material If Rerdell had sworn that he
heard conversation between Dorsey and
Brady, at which Belford was present, would
they not be allowed to show that Belford was
not present? That story was false. He had
said that Beiford got check. If they could
show that that was false, would it not tend
to prove that his statement about the other
checks was false? 1t was certainly material.
He wanted to show that no such check had
been received by Belford, and that Rerdell
had sworn falsely when he had said it, There
was another view of this matter: In the
present state of the public mind, any wit
ness, however low could touch and smirch
and stain the reputation of any man, no
matter how high he stood, no matter if he
were the greatest figure in the land Would
the court allow this witness the same privi-
lege to tell the truth as had been allowed
other witnesses to tell falsehood? 1t was
upon the same question--the checks. If
Rerdel had touched the reputation of Mr..
Belford, was it possible he would shrink
from touching the reputation of the men on