The Evening critic., 1883-05-25

I TTUVV IT. viii IHHUTtO TnTnutOneH9. 1T thOy BOT
out that an anldavlt was written on bark, they
must produce bark afIldavit. II they were
foolish enough TO say itwae written In rcd ink,
they must produce II In red ink. II they al
lege that an oath was sworn to twice before
| Two notaries public, they must produce an
oath sworn TO twice. They arc
Bound 10 Prove Exactly what Thcy
Charge,
| and II they were too particular about Il that
| say that all these, with tho exception OF
the two routes have named, were filed too
Now, Will come to those routes. Remember,
| that every overt act must be after the con.
splracy. There are two exceptions, and those
| Two exceptions include petitions and affldavits.
And there is splendid kind of Justice In the
way this thing is coming out, so far as that is
The petitions filed on the Toquerviile route
| and on Bridge Creek route, I believe arc genu.
Inc; believe the Government admits that they
are honest; and they were not attacked except
| upon one point, and that was that a daily
| mail did not mean seven times week. The
point made by tho Government was that a
daily mall meant six trips week-that Is,
where you have them every day. We took
the ground that
Daily Mail Meant n Mail Every Day.
and thatin the Western countryas here they
that you cannot have daily mail without hay.
Ing seven trips week. l think that was the
only point made against these petitlons-that
rney y were Tor daily mail, and that somebody
No petition for Increase OF service alone was
ever attacked by the Government in this case,
except % L. on The Dallas route, and 20 II
and 20 II, on the Canyon City route. 20 L was
nled April %, 1870. That was two months
100 carry, before the conspiracy had life.
Mi. Carpenter-One.
Mr.. Ingersoll-Yes; one month before the
conspiracy had life. Consequently that is
mustered out OF this case as an overt act.
% l. was filed Juno 27, 1879, aud is In time.
provided 1t had been dishonest petition And
IT, IT, is me only petition nled on the date alleged
was signed by the business men of Baker City,
and Is set out, believe, on page 1917.
~, 20 was filed May z. That is not In time.
29H has no file mark, and ever was proved.
30 that goes.
All the allegations as TO false petitions for
increase OF service-and by that mean addi-
tionnl trtps-are shown to have been genuine,
honest, true petitions.
described. Both were made by Peck. Mr..
Blies admits that Peck had nothing to do with
any OF these routes after April 1, 1870, and
sworn to before that date.
The affidavit on the Toquervllo route was
Filed by vi. c. RerdeII,
| who swear5 that he was not in any conspiracy
TO TO defraad the United States; that he was not
| John w. Dorsey, nor with anybody else, 1t
was filed by the subcontractor OF record, NJ.
Q. Rerdell and 1t Is the same route on which
Mr.. Rerdell, by virtue OF his subcontract, ap-
propriated about $4,000 Of money belonging
| to other people.
The other exception Is on the Bridge Greek
route, and, strange as 1t may appear, that was
also hleo by Mr.. Rerdell. And, strange as 1t
may appear, 1t has not been successfully I'M.
peached as TO the men and horses necessary
under the existing and proposed schedules.
Ihe overt act is not proved, becanse the oath
is & not proved to be false, and because Peck
and Rerdcll, according to Mr.. Bliss admission
and according to Rerdell's oath, were not in
the conspiracy, and the overt act has to be
done by one OF the conspirators, OF course.
I'm fau prrA u,-v
The Court-I understood-I do not know
whether have been under a delusion all this
time or not-that the Indictment charged that
these anldayits and false petitions were the
means by which the conspiracy was to be car
ried into execution; that they were not the
overt acts. II they had been set out as overt
seen that they antedated the time, and If an
objection had been made to them the Court
would not have received them as overt acts.
The reason why they have been admitted and
regarded as in the case all along, to my mind,
was that they were acts tending to prove, SO
far as they tended TO prove anything, the
nature of the combination between these
parties anterior to the Odd OF May.
Mr.. Ingersoll-Before the conspiracy.
me Court-Belore the conspiracy. So that
Whatever character belonged to that associa-
tion anterior to that time, II 1t was continued
on after that time, carried out with overt acts
done subsequently to that time they were
properly received as evidence going TO estab.
lish the conspiracy-not as overt acts, but as
means to show the character of the combina.
ti9n among the parties anterior to that date.
Mr. lngersoll-That saves me a great deal of
argument. Now, understand, gentlemen,
that the Court Will instruct you that you eau
moi moi 'aRe any Petition, any letter, any oath,
written, or used prior to the 23d OF May, 1870,
as an overt act that all that evidence is for is
to show you the relations sustained by the
parties before that time.
The Court-Yes; you are right.
MT. ingersoll-Now, that saves great deal
OF trouble.
Nh Fvidapoa Tho. <,n,>nor n
COnspired.
Now comes the pext point. What are the
overt acts In the indictment? Really they are
the orders made by Mr.. Brady, unless you take
this poor little affidavit made by Peck and
Then comes the next point. You cannot
treat anything as an overt act unless 1t was
made by one of the conspirators. Is there any
evidence in this case that Mr.. Brady ever con-
spired with anybody? Not the slightest And
unless he conspired with us any order made
by him cannot be regarded as an overt act in
this case. think everybody will admit that.
Unless Brady conspired with us and we with
him any order OF his cannot be regarded as an
overt net. ask you, gentlemen, what evil
dence is there In this case that Mr.. Brady ever
conspired with any of these defendants? /
VIII answer that question before get through,
ana mink VIII answer 1t to your entire
satisfaction.
Colonel Ingersoli then called attention to the
his opinion Of Mr.. Dorsey Is % that se he is an
honest man; that he is q plain, straightfor-
ward man. 1t is claimed that John W. Dorsey |
was one OF the original conspirators; that he |
helped to hatch and plot this terrible design. |
Let us see what interest John W. Dorsey had,
You nave heard me read the agreement he |
made, have you not, with Miner? Now, let |
me read TO you the agreement that he made
on the 10th day OF August, 1878, believe.
Now, we Will find out what interest John w.
Dorsey had In all this conspiracy. On the 10Th
OF August, 1873,
There Was No Reason For Telling
Any Lie About 1t.
They could not get on the routes In August,
1875 they had net the money, and SO they |
took In Vale. At that time, gentlemen, there
was no reason for them writing ANYTHING in
this paper that was not true not the slightest,
And take 1t for granted that most people tell
the truth when there is no possible object In
telling anything else, If their memory is
'.This agreement dated the 10th of August,
pendence, Missouri: John II. Miner, of San
dusky, Ohio; John M. Peck, of Colfax County,
New Mexico, and John W. Dorsey, OF Middle.
bury, Vermont, wltnesseth as follows;
"1st. copartnership Is hereby formed by
and between the aforementioned parties for
inc purpose OF managing certain mail routes
In the Western States and Territories. said
routes are all those which have been awarded
10 said Miner, Peck and Dorsey for the con.
1882" ~
Now, go on to the fourth paragraph for the |
purpose of finding out what interest one al |
my clients, John W. Dorsey, had at that time |
In this great conspiracy:
"1th. The profits accruing from the bust. |
ness snail be divided as follows: From routes |
in Indian Territory, Kansas. Nebraska and pa. |
n Unil -.