The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-03-28

Wh ~ ltuVe 10 read the
was not the check referred to. Ingersoll
had called Reerdell the pillar OF the prose
cution; that was not so. If all this testi-
mony were blotted ont, there would remain
enough evidence to make out the case. The
pillar OF the prosecution was oil the eyi-
denoe, and not until they had pulled down
all Of 1t would the structure be shaken
! lngersoll promised 10 produce every
check and to account for every dollar. Let
the prosecution consult with their witness
lkeredeli), who was assisting them. Then
let them specify the particular check and he
woHld trace the money.
! Merrick--"Why did you not produce the
stub booksP
| lngersoll-"You may get more stubs
than you want.
After argument the court refused to allow
the check TO be put in evidence. Wilson
moved to strike out, so far as
Brady was concerned, all that
Reredell had said about Dorsey's
drawing money from Middleton's bank, be-
ing at the Citizens bank and going to Bra
| dy's. The court refused to entertain the
motion until all the checks had been of
Tered. The examination was then resumed.
| Witness said that while it was possible he
had gone with Reerdell on June 9th to
draw money from Middleton's he did not
believe he had; did not 20 to the post
Office department and INTO Brady's room
as described by Reerdell; did not pay any
money to Brady on that or any other occa-
sion; did not draw check on Middleton &
Co., for $1,000 IN June. lngersoll asked il
any OF them added together wonld aggre-
gate that amount. Witness said he
| couldn't say, and could only report
what his clerk told him. after n careful ey.
animation Of the checks, probably for four
| or five days in June, Reerdell had access to
witness check books. lngersol referred TO
lteerdells statement of the contents of Il
letter from Dorsey to Basler, inviting Bos-
Ter to assume an interest in the business,
setting out the financial state of the hus,-
ness and including an account of indebted.
ness To 1T. j.. Il. Witness said there was
not u grain of truth in the story: he had
never written such letter to anybody in
the world, and never said anything was to
be paid To "T. j. Ii. y or any post-oilice off.
cials. lngersol then referred to Reerdells
statement that the papers had been taken
from his Office while he was in jail Wit
ness said he had only entered that office
twice; Reerdell was there upon both ocoa-
slons the last time was upon Reerdells in
yitation, after his release from iail. Reer. |
dell was closing up his office aud packed up |
bundle OF papers which he took to wit |
ness house and left there; that bundle |
was still untouched and unopened Mt his |
mousse witness never had key |
to that Office and did not enter II while |
Reerdell was in jail. Reerdelrs statement
of the conversation at Willard's hotel, on |
July %, 1882, when he was locked In and |
ordered TO make another affidavit, was
taken up. Witness said that some time in
July, during the last trial, Reerde.l at
tempted 10 blackmail Boser. The state.
ment was ruled out by the court. Witness
said he went TO Bosler's room at Wilard's
and found Reerdell there with Bosler; he
was protesting to Boser that the all,ga-
tions as to what he (Reerdell had been do |
ing, were untrue.
A recess was taken at this point After
recess the grand jury came into court with |
u number of presentments, among them
the following: United States against
Thomas Brady for unlawiuly receiving
money and postal drafts to the amount OF |
$1,000. while second assistant postma ster-
general, from James Il. Price, as reward |
Tor making u contract for mail service with |
Price on July 81, 1880, upon the star-route
from Socorro to Silver City, New Mexico; |
against William Pitt Kellogg and Thomas
j. Brady for conspiracy on April II, 1880, !
With James y. Price to de. |
expenditures and false and fraudulent |
claims to be made for increased pay for ex. |
pedition on post routes from Monroe TO |
Shreveport, Louisiana, and San Antonio to |
Corpus Christi in Texas. the said routes |
being then IN name of James B. Price as |
contractor; agains, William Pitt Kellogg, |
setting forth that OF April IL, 1850, whilst !
senator from Louisiana. he did unlawiully |
receive 'ron James u. Price. contractor ON
post-routes from Monroe to shreveport, |
Louisiana aud San Antonio to Corpus |
hrlsti, Texas, II cerlOin sum of money,
post.oillce drain and promisory note to-
gether OF the value OF $50 900, tor the ser
vice OF procuring. prrsuaiiug aud inducing
Thomas j, Brady, SECOND assistant post.
mastr-general, TO award and allow to
frlce an increase Of pay and |
compensation tor carrying mail with in.
creased speed on ana over each of said
routes, and corruptly influencing the action
OF said Brady therein. Another present.
ment against Brady was for having
on or about April 18th, 1850
whilst second assistant postmaster.ren, zen
eral, unlawiully received certain money,
post-oilice drafts and u note, together being
OF the value OF $4,000, MS compensation for
the service OF awarding to James B. Price,
mail contractor, u contract on each of the
routes from Monroe TO Shreveport, Louisi-
ana, and San Antonio to Corpus Christi,
Texas, to carry mail with increased speed
and for increased pay. The witnesses
named are John A. Walsh, James b. Brice,
Joseph Cochran and J. W. Brady.
The examination OF witness was then re.
sumcd. lie denied broadly Rcerdeiis
statement OF the conversation at Willarn's
hotel md declared II was bltckmailing
scheme on the part OF Reerdell, who haI
Threatened To have Bpslpr indicted and 10
go over ~ the government; regarding the
all iuvit of June, 1881, which was read 10
hiln, witness denied that he had n-hed
R.erhel to make II for the sake o. ns
family, or that he had offered him amy
inducement. letter dated Jnlv
1882 from Rperd,l TO Dpse, wis
read by Ingersol. Recrdell writes iltld he
has been considering the step he va. n.nt
to take ior over ear. He had in'rn,i,l
TO put himselfin communication wi'h ,iie
government before he was indicted. Neyrt
L.. -.