Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-03-19
INVESTIGATING THE OT"rNAN CASE
Ex.Dfstrict Attorney Wells Examined.

bylaws 10 the next meeting.
INVESTIGATING THE OT-rMAN CASE
Ex-District Attorney Wells Examined.
HE THINKS THE GOVERNMENT COULD HAVE REcov-
Erred ALL THE MONEY By THE CIVIL SUIT A
COMPROMISE HAD NOT BEEN MADE.
Ex-District Attorney H. II. Wells appeared before
the Springer committee to-day to tell what he knew
about the Ottman case. He said he assumed the
duties OF district attorney shortly after the ottman
robbery occurred, and tried the case twice, the
jury dlsagreeing each time. He told the story OF
the robbery as has been told often before and
detailed the progress OF the trials. He explained
now the government had expected to prove the
money found deposited in the bank at Alexandria
by Ottman to be portion OF that stolen from the
treasury, by certain coincidence OF numbers
Which could not have existed after the money had
been once distributed and put in circulation He
then produced the papers in the case, explaining
to the committee the various drafts and checks
paid to "Peg-leg" Browne upon the order OF Ott-
man, showing that all the money handled was in
$500 bills, corresponding to those stolen
COMPROMISE PROPOSITION EEJECTEp
lie said that before the trial began proposition
was made to him (Mr. Wells) by Mr. Elliott, one OF
Ottmans counsel, to compromise the matter by
allowing the government to retain the money In
ltS possession II Ottman would receive but a nomf-
nal imprisonment This Mr.. Wells said was made
TO him in the lobby at the city hall and he said he
thought such a compromise would not be accepted.
though IL might II Ottnan would consent 10 the
ordinary Imprisonment in a penitentiary; but the
defense refused to do this He communicated the
oHer TO the Department OF Justice, and it was re-
lected- Witness said the strongest argument made
by the defense and the one that had the greatest
enect upon the jury was tnat Halleck was the
thief and falsely sought in his confession to throw
the responsibility on Ottman to screen himself.
Mr. WELLS THINKS THE GOVERNMENT COULD HAVE
RECOVERED THE MONEY BY CIVIL SUIT
"Do you Think asked Mr.. Springer, ''that in the
civil suit the government could have recovered the
stolen money!
81 do" replied the witness 81 have no doubt
That all the money located could have been recov-
cred by the government
Mr. Springer then read from Mr. Bliss report the
statement. With relation TO the compromise, that
Mr. Wells had told him that he felt sure that con-
Nlctlon could not be secured by the government,
ana asked witness II the statement was true.
The witness replied that he had told Mr. Bliss
that he did not think conviction could be secured
IN the criminal trial. but had not spoken OF the
civil cases He said that he told Mr.. Bliss at the
same time that he knew OF his personal knowl-
edge that Ottman was guilty. but could not use
this knowledge in the prosecution to do so would
Dt breach OF professional confidence.
WITNESS INTERVIEW WITH BLISS
Witness did not know anything on the subject Of
the compromise. The conversation he had det tailed
was about two years ago; it was In April or May,
1882. Bliss did not say who had proposed a COM
promise, but said one had been proposed. Witness
had only one Interview with Bliss. Witness defined
the difference between the rule In civil and crini-
nal cases Witness regarded the case at Alexandria
as much the strongest, because there was no Jury
and 1t ought not to have taken judge half day
to make up his opinion. Witness reiterated
the opinion that conviction could have been Sc
cured here. He believed he told Mr. Bliss that
He told Bliss all he knew about the case. Witness
told Bliss the case ought not to be compromised
and he told Bliss that every dollar could be recov-
cred by the government In civil suits The
law Is that If one comes unlawfully In
possession OF anothers money, he can be
may have got 1t 1nnocently. Witness did not
deem HalleckS testimony as necessary. ON the
other hand he was not sure the case was not weak
half. The witness described his conversation with
Elliott, who offered In behalf OF Ottman
TO SURRENDER $4,000 PROVIDED THE CASES WOULD
BE DISMISSED,
and Ottman permitted to go to jail for not more
than one year. Witness replied that he would
recommend a dismissal on the surrender OF the
1000 provided that Ottman should 60 to the pen
to the Attorney General and rejected. though wit
ness refused it because the penitentiary provision
was refused. Witness advised Bliss OF this propo-
StiOn Bliss told witness he was adjusting the OFT
General. and without fee pay. He said tie attOr-
ney General was Overburdened, and he bliss, was
helping him out as friend. Bliss said the Attorney
General first called his attention to the case.
Witness again declared that Bliss was wrong in
recommending compromise because Halleck was
absent, as he said the case against Ottman was
stronger without Halleck's testimony than with it.
Witness did not think the assignment OF the money
In Alexandria to Others for counsel fees ought TO
have bafied the prosecution OF justice Bliss never
got from witness the conclusion that the govern
ment ought TO compromise on the money offered
because witness firmly believed that all the money
could be recovered.
The committee adjourned until tomorrow at 10
a M, when Col. Bliss will be examined