Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-03-08

ment was compelled to make out their
case by secondary evidence. They were
not obliged to do it if the book did not
exist. and if they had represented that
to the court, but now the court had right
to assume that the evidence did exist, and
was in the hands of the defense. If they
would contradict Reerdel it must be in the
same essential matter. In the matter of
the court, what he had said in regard to
Belford had no relation to any of the de-
PENDANTS. 1t did not necessarily cast any
imputation on
MIR. BRLFoRD's CHARACTER,
because the stub showed the check had
been drawn to the order of BeIford. Il
did not show a relation to any matter
charged in this Indictment.
Mr.. Davidge-But it was charged to the
mail.
The Court replied-It might have been
drawn to the order of Bedford Or bearer,
and somebody else might have
drawn the money. Bedford might
never have seen the check
1t was very common thing. They
could not contradict the evidence of the
witness without producing the book. The
objection was therefore sustained.
MIR. Ingersoll then asked the witness if
be had ever received any property for the
use of his influence at the postoffice de-
partment to secure the increase of the
service upon those routes. AS basis for
his question, he referred to Reerders state
ment in relation to an entry of $4,000 in
ReerdePs name. He said the prosecution
ought not to;deprive Belford of an opportu-
nifty to deny this statement. He could not
have imagined that Reerdel would refer to
James B. Belford, any moro than the chief
justice. He thought he had to ask these
questions to show the witness that he had
acted in good faith in seeking an extern
sion of the mail service.
Davidge also thought witness should
have an opportunity to vindicate himself
The court said the witness could do that
by making an affidavit before Justice of
the peace as to Wilson's point that Brady
was not responsible for Dorsey's failure to
produce the books. The court had some
time ago decided that the defendants were
JOINT and not separate defendants, and
that the action of one was the action of
all. After the accumulation of evidence
of conspiracy had justified the court in
submitting it to jury, Reerders state
ments could not be contradicted by
secondary evidence, when the court knew
that the defense had primary evidence
The evidence showed that they used
fictitious names to conceal fraudulent
entries, and the fact that
Belford's full name had been used was an
| argument to show that 10 fraud existed
in that connection.
Mr.. Carpenter-But it has charge, and
to the mail.
The court replied the entry might have
| been made in connection with some of the
legitimate mail business. At any rate the
court would not allow the proposed in
curry.
Mr.. IngersOn put number of questions
to the witness intending to show the good
faith in which referations had been made
TO the department, but the court uniform
! ~ refused to allow them, saying it
would presume legally and from
the facts, that there was no imputation
against Bedford. The witness had said
everything a man could state to get the
service he had stated, not only to Brady
but to the other officers of the department.
Recess.
After recess the subject of the missing
letter again came up. Bedford insisted
that letter or copy be put in evidence.
He did not intend to be suppressed. They
were going to examine him about it and
he wanted to read it.
The prosecution were unable to find the
original letter, and copy was introduced
instead, which the witness was permitted
to read. 1t was letter pstitioning for an
increase of one Colorado route, signed BY
the chief justice of the state and many
prominent officials. The cross-examina-
ton was confined to the questions con-
corning the handwriting of the letter that
witness had said had been written by his
clerk, Delavan w. Geek, but had beer
signed by himself.
BOUND TO MAKE AN EXPLANATION.
Belford was then directed to stand
aside. He appeared to be somewhat agi-
tated, took up MS hat and walked over to
the counsels' tables, and turning to
the court said with much
feeling: Your honor, wish
to ask the indulgence of the court and the
courtesy of the bar to make per-
sonal statement in regard to the charges
affecting my honor"
Mr.. Merrick was at once on his feet with
an objection. 1t was at his suggestion, he
said, that the record in regard to Bedford
had been modified. If the witness had any
statement to make to the country, he could
make it. But, certainly, the proceedings
of court of justice should not be inter
fered with by allowing a witness who hap
pened to be member of the bar, to step
from the witness stand to the counsel ia
BILE, aud state to the jury and to the court,
what, as witness, he had not been allow
ed to state on the stand. He felt bound to
resist it as matter of justice to the court
and the cause and order.
give me the poor privilege" pleaded
Belford, 'of making a statement"
This is not public meeting, replied the
court; we are trying case judicially.
state before the living God, said Bel
ford, solemnly and Indignantly, that /
never saw such check. Then turning on
his heel, Bedford started from the court
room, but he was recalled by the COM
handing voice of the judge who exclaimed:
"Come here sir! Bring Mr.. Bslford herer'
Belford having returned, the courtinquired
what he had said, and Bedford repeated it
with emphasis.
This is a contempt of court" exclaimed
his honor, "and the court imposes fine of