Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-04-02
THE STAR ROUTE TRIAL.
CrOsS-Examinatfono of Ex-senator Dor.
Sey Continued.

| CrOsS-ExaRsinatfon of Ex-senator Dor.
| sey Continued.
When the star route trial was resumed this
morning ex-senator Dorsey took his place again
| upon the stand, and Mr. Merrick continued the
| cross-examination. The witness did not remcm-
| Der whether when he gave directions to Boone In
1873 about tie preparation of bids he gave him any
instructions about the number OF trips or the length
| OF the routes upon which he was to prepare bids
He had no recollection of such conversation as
Boone detailed about this matter, but was unwill-
ing to say that it did not occur. Witness recol-
| 1ectet that Boone told him he had destroyed a
large number OF bids on routes having over three
| trips week. They were destroyed because they
were unable to give certified checks to the amount
| that would be required II such routes were
awarded to them. Witness did not recoiect that
| he had Instructed Boone to destroy these bids.
| MR.. INGERsoLLs REPLY TO NOTICE TO PRODUCE
CERTAIN LETTERS.
| Mr.. Ingersol stated that he received a notice
| served on s. W. Dorsey to produce in court this
morning letter-press copy book containing let
lers ;' written , or SIGNED by him bearing date May
that" said Mr.. Ingersoll ais that we have 10 let
ter book containing any press copy OF any letter
| Der, 1878. to John W. Dorsey. We have letter
| written copy OF which we will produce, written
On On the 7th OF December. 1873, to John w. Dorsey.
| we have no press copy book containing any letter
written on the 18th day OF May, 1879, appertanng
directly or indirectly to this business"
Mr.. Bliss suggested that il this notice was to be
| replied to In this way the reply should be made
| under oath.
| Mr.. Ingersoll raised the point that this notice
was to produce secondary evidence, and he argued
| that such notice would not lay the foundation
for proving the contents OF the letters by other
| Messrs Merfick and Bliss argued ut some length
IN support OF the notice they had given
Mr.. IDgerSOll denied the right Of the prosecution
| to the letter books.
| JUDGE wYLIE's RULING.
| After considerable discussion Judge Wylie said
| 1t was general rule that a defendant was not
| bound to produce any evidence against himself.
A notice would be given him to produce an
orig ina paper, and If he failed to produce it the
pros ecution could prove its contents by secondary
| evidence. The defendant might have then second
| ary evidence that would be more satisfactory
Una, tnan a. that at. IN n the possession Of the prose-
boun d to produce 1t. So at last the prosecution
was driven to its own secondary evidence. But no
the contents of a paper unless previous notice is
given TO produce the original, unless the purpose
| or or the secondary evidence was given to adduce
the defendants admission that the original had
| existed. In such case the, prosecution might
nave a right to give notice to produce this evil
dence, but that would not compel the production of
It, In this case he thought the notice was confined
10 strictly secondary evidence. He was OF opinion
that the notice here to produce letterpress books
Without reference to particular letter, was too
vague. 1t did not designate any letters that
| seemedto be relevant to the case. The defendant
|
| the case The notice should have described some
letter feo III IN such way that te court could decide
MI. Bliss observed that when witness went On
the stand he could be compelled to give oral or
Judge sd ha IN 's sas case the oeen
dant was bound by the same rules as any other
witness.
DoRsEY's LETTER-PREss BOOK MUFILATED.
The witness said his clerk had searched to see II
he could find a letter dated December O. 1878, but
had not found It His letter. press copy book was
mutlated there and elsewhere. Witness clerk
had also looked for a copy OF letter to Rosler,
Gased @ NAY IL, 1871. tut had been unable 70 find
Mr. Merr1ck asked the witness If his letter book
at that point appeared to be mut1lated.
Mr.. 1ngersoll objected that the witness could not
pe mace TO testify as to papers OF that kind alleged
to 6e In the possession of the defense. MI. Inger-
SOIL said their theory was that Rerdel had written
these letters and torn them from the letter book
and they were in the possession OF the govern
ment During the course OF the discussion he de-
THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NEVER sEB THESE
BOOKS,
no matter ii they contained only poetry about
spring.
Judge wylie SAID Mr.. Merr1ck could ask his
question. .,@s
The witness said he had found his books mutt
lated at the date OF May 18Th, 1879, and had dis
BOOK had been torn out.
CHECK os.THE GERMAN AMERICAN BANK.
The witness said he had looked for a check for
1862 So payable to P. G. Reynolds, sent to ohm
w. Dorsey, and drawn on the German-American
bank July Is, 1878, but had not found it. He had
not looked at his bank book. Mr.. Keyser, receiver
OF the German-American National bank, here pro-
duced large account book. This was shown to
the witness. who testified, -vicariousy. through
Mr. Ingersoli, that there appeared charge
against him dated July 25. 1873, OF s56s SO. Mr..
keySer. was then swern, and testified that the
book was the ledger account OF the bank.
The witness had no recollection OF seeing A. ".
Moore more than once, and that was in the spring
OF 1878.
DORsEY's RECOLLECTION.
The witness did not remember having asked
Boone to recommend some one who would be a
suitable man to go west and take charge of the
routes. Witness thought Boone had called on
witness and asked him to send a check to Mrs.
iSaafes He had found check Endorsed by Eliza
Meefa, which made the witness think he had sent
the c6ecN. Tile witness had had conversation
with Boone since Boone vas on the stand, which
had refreshed his recollection about the check.
The usual recess was taken.
The Less Of the AShuelOt.