The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-07-23
THE TRIAL OF HARRISON.
The Defense Objects to Reconsideration of Ex-
pert TestimOny-0ne of Harrison's Letters.

The preliminary examination Of Alfred Harri-
son, charged with forgery, was resumed before
Acting Mayor Smock, last evening Harrison has
added to his counsel in addition to Messrs Walls
and Green. James Cropsey and the colored at
torney, Scott Turner John G. McCutcheon,
cashier of the First National Bank and Henry
L. Smith, teller of that bank. testified as to the
circumstances attending the presentation of the
check by the negro, John Wheat on Saturday
last A. j. Joyce H. w. Olmstead Alex G.
Jameson and others were present to be put upon
the witness stand as experts in hand writing. A
number of papers were introduced by the prose
cution, legal instruments of various kinds which
the State intended to prove were written by
Harrison. and then by means of the experts to
show that the same person who had
written those instruments had filed
out the forged check. The defense
admitted that the papers were in the handwrit
ing of Harrison, and that the check was a for
gerry, but held that the State could not prove
by expert testimony. by comparison of the hand
writing of the check with papers admitted to be
in Harrlsons handwriting that che check was in
the same handwriting-th is that papers hav-
ing no connection with the case could not be
brought in to prove forgery. The attorneys
for the defense cited Jones vs. The State. Six
tieth Indiana, page PAL American Criminal Law.
Volume B. page 1872 The court adjourned until
o'clock this morning.
The following is copy of the letter which
Harrison when an attorney for the defendant in
the Swannegan divorce case wrote to George L.
Perrine, the plaintiffs counsel few days before
the time fixed for the trial, when the defendant
was sick in bed. The letter is one of the docu-
ments introduced in the case to show the similar
ity of the forged signature to Harrison's writing:
June 6, 1883.
Samson Swanpegan VS.. Lucy V. Swannegan.
Wherein A. Harrison appears for the defendant the
following proposition, though DEPRESSION from the
ordinary course OF practice hereinafter agree to- in
consideration of these facts and circumstances of the
case, to-wit will default the and not appear
when it shall be called for trial will inform
my client of the matter and further better hide
my tracks from being known, will have legal bust.
out of the city that day when the
case is called say at Richmond Ind,
1t be worked in this way nicely and successfully,
and while she is in bed more successfully will so
default client upon these terms in consideration of
$40 nothing more less and not after it is done and
all over l will only accept in advance You may
trust my honor to this my proposition. for will
do agreed and here stipulated. And if we agree
as to my terms let me know at once and will then
take all the steps necessary to affect our purpose.
WILL it we agree, look for and expect settlement
in terms mentioned by at least Saturday morning,
June 8, 1888 See your client.
Saturday being rule day in R g. You would better,
If agree TO have the defendant called and the
set for trial and let it be settled possible
Yours, A HARRISON.
Perrine made no reply to this document, and,
asked for an allowance to his client for the ex-
penses of her suit. This allowance was made.
A day or two afterward Perrine, by instruction
of his Client dismissed tue suit