The daily gazette., 1883-01-03
THE aEYBoLD CASE.
Cross Examination of the Plaintiff by
hir. Bayard

The direct examination of Anthony Rey-
bold was concluded In the United States
Court yesterday afternoon, and Mr.. Bird
then read notice from the plaintiff to the
defendant, dated December IS, 1864, TO the
effect that he, the plaintiff, reseinded and
annulled his part of the agreement. The
defendants reply to this notice, written
December 81, 1854, was also read and EN-
bodied a refusal TO concur with the plain
tif's action.
The cross-examination was then begun by
by Mr.. Bayard and continued until the
hour of adjournment. Nothing particularly
new was brought out, although the witness
was closely examined. He testified that he
undertook to establish freight line between
Philadelphia and New York. He had three
boats for the purpose. This undertaking
ceased about 1856, or before be went into
the Philadelphia and Baltimore Union
Company, which was organized In
1857. William Barney and Anthony
Reybold owned one half of the
Union Line and Thomas Clyde the other
half. In transferring the property Of this
company TO the Philadelphia and Baltimore
Company he received 225 shares of the
capital stock of the latter company as his
share, valued at G,I25, but he never got
anything out of the stock. He Joined In
the deed of conveyance of the boats of the
Union Company to the Philadelphia and
Baltimore Company.
Alexander Evans, Esq, of Elkton, Of
counsel for defendant, announced that he
would be unable to give any further at
tendance upon the case as he had a very
urgent engagement at Elkton.
Three stenographers are engaged In taking
notes, and every morning the lawyers are
furnished with copies OF the preceding day Is
work printed by type writers.
THIS MORNINGS SESSION.
At the opening of the court this morning
Mr.. Reybold, whose examination was con-
cluded yesterday, was recalled by the plain
tiff in reply 10 a question In the cross-ex-
animation, and asked TO tell why certain
! boat had not been put on earlier In the
season. The question was waived by Mr..
Bird upon the objection of Mr.. Gray that
the question was not in reply to anything
brought out In the cross-examination.
Mr.. Gray then gave the name of the de-
feudant company as "The New York Il
Baltimore Transportation Company" The
other companies spoken OF were "The Balti-
more Il Philadelphia Union Steamboat
Company" owned by the Reynolds, and
"The Philadelphia 81 Baltimore Steamboat
Company" an opposition line to that run
| by the plaintiff
Thomas J. Cleaver Of Chesapeake City,
was then called. He has for many years
| been in the employ of the Chesapeake &
Delaware Canal Company, and from 1858 tn
| 1878 was collector of tolls. Under exami-
nation by Mr.. Bradford the manner of esti.
mating tolls due and the collecting of the
same were explained by the witness. The
amount of toll charged through the cana
| varied according to circumstances.
Mr.. Bradford stated TO the court that the
offer of the plaintiff was TO show the amount
of freights carried through the canal in 1861
by the New York company. The Original
books of entries would be offered in evidence
to show the tolls paid by the defendant
company.
| Mr.. Gray objected to the offer of testi
mony made by the plaintiff, as it would b.
an attempt to show the profits made by th'
defendant company.
There were two grounds of objection. On
| was that 1t was not a proper element o
damage, and the other that what the de
fendant realized or was able to make wa
not matter for the jury. Objection wa
| also offered the manner of attempting II
prove the fact, presenting books instead Of
verbal testimony.
George Fl. Bates, ESQ, Of counsel TO
plaintiff, was present in the court room AM
expects to remain during the continuance o
the trial
Ninety witnesses are down for examina
ton.
1 Continued in second edition.