Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-04-11

rSn nad stated that Parker the contractor urged
hlm TO md out the price OF superintendent Hunt,
oI the railway mail service at St Louis, Parker
ouering TO furnish the money 10 buy Parker, but
Parrish said he could not buy Parker-he was not
purchasahle
Mr. Springer asked II the witness had laid before
tiie grand jury aS clear statement OF the facts
concerning the Vinlta and Las Vegas route as he
had submitted TO the committee.
MI woodward said he did not: that he was In q
hurry When ne went before the Mitchell grand
jury, and was interrupted very often. he went
over the case hurrediy. Witness regarded this
route as presenting
THE STRONGEST CASE THE GOVERNMENT HAD,
and II he had been responsible for the prosecution
he would have hung to it week until he got every
TACT oelore Them He was not responsible, so be
Simply did what MI. Bliss told him TO do. He fol
lowed Bliss instructions strictly before the grand
Jury. lie presumed Bliss knew just what be
wanted, and witness implicitly obeyed Bliss Il
Was Bliss business 10 know what he wanted, cid
twas not witness business
QueStion-"So far as you were concerned. did you
DO everything In your power SO far as you were
called upon 10 lay these facts before the grand
Ans-"I should say did,
Witness could not undertake to say upon whom
Responsibility for failure TO indct rested. II migh
liLsht rest upon Co.. Bliss, Who was responsible Iol
presenting the case. or upon the grand Jury. jury
ness did
THE F,ILuRR TO INprcT
MI Springer asked II all the facts submitted u
the committee were accessible TO Bliss for use be
fore the jury. The witness replied that they were
that al the evidence. oral and documentary. wa;
at Bliss command. When witness heard OF the re
sl TO lndict he did not attempt to account for it
D'h he had understood that the government hat
decided 70 arb.tya'e rather than prosecute and h,
supposed II WAS an right. as the parties who reached
t,.at decision were more competent 10 determin,
than the witness
The line OF Mr. Sprngers interrogarores was z
ascertain II Col Bliss did present the evidence IL
al us iorce ana strength To the grand jury.
witness SiiI Ee could not explain the failure X
ihdrt The Pafkers md San,burts he said thai
one Mclcvitt. an cmplove OF The Sn,llburIs wa
| willing To give th"',. away, In consideration tha
he should - ImlnE ny. Witness was satisret
! %=fcSlij could have de- ,e what he promised an,
%hd witness had chag"' II the prosecution N
s4u.d have n~ed NcIeytt - convict tn cputrau
tors anu he believed Il cnulA Aave been done. Wit
ness promised GcDcyitt imL unity after taikia.
Win NeS,rs. N,cNotEh AND Eam.>, but at,
Nir|caGh went out that was ,..>r.garttsi. au,
NrbrNitt VAS sent To the pCuitentl.. e. Nituc>
believed Mr Bliss selected the cases - pruscCu
tlol which he tEi-s' considered the srrons
HOW WALSH GOT !NTo TROUBLE
witness said that the origin or the trouble bc
tween Walsh ana the other star routcr. was nj
tWalShsl refusal 10 contribute the E. 90 aSsesSet
against him for the rund 10 be used To Influence tn
Forty sixth Congress 10 make the Sl.AN6t} pasta
| appropriation. After this refusal his rmbarra-s
mehtS began, and his troubles were all aftTihutaD
TO Ills refusal 10 contribute 10 the Conlressiona
corruption fund
The witness said, on closing his Testimony, tha
! he knew that all NJ had told the committee VA
the truth, end t1at he had not told all the trut b
because he could not break coniidences that boUn,
him. He would not violate condolences even TO eX
pose raSCas.
Witness was dismissed with the understanding
tnat he might De called again.