New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-09-18


had fehday yesterday He cross examined Eds
ward W. Woodruff. In doing he occupied all the
forenoon and nearly all the afternoon session Of the
court, and provided for the large number Of specf
tators present enjoyable entertainment Of artistic
witness-baiting Woodruff a dinicult subject.
lie required great deal OF poking and rousng. He
drove Mr. Brooke from rage to rage by his apses Of
memory, his don't knows and his "couldnt says
and he tried the patience OF Recorder smyth once
twice. This was all very well so long as the mero
recital Of the rise and progress Of the Ives firm and
lis dealings with the Cincinnati. Hamilton and Day
ton road were the subjects of inquiry. But Mr. Brooke
had In reserve tremendous assault Oh the tristworth
Of the informer and after he had led up BY
well selected series OF questions he forced the cring
ing fellow on the witness stand 10 acknowledge thai
he had again and again and again committed wilful
perjury I'm examination on oath we'll In sworn
affidavit about matters less directly connected
with Henry S. Ives and his doings
Several prominent visitors 10 see the fun,s
and among those who sat beside the Recorder and
listened to part OF Woodruf's confessions was In-
spector Bymes. 1t was conceded by all who attended
the court that, lively things for several hours
the day exceedingly long one, and Recordes
smyth will perform popular well as a charitable
act II he allows two hOurs recess from TO T. between
the afternoon and evening sessions to day and for tho
Of the trial. instead Of the scant hour
ceded for dinner and breathing time.
Mr.. Woodruff told OF the various lines Of business
I'm which he has been engaged and they not few,
and OF the beginning of his connection with Ives.
He substantially repeated his account Of the formation
OF the Ives firm, of the acquisition Of tho control Of
the c., II. and ID. railroad, and OF the election of
Ives, Stayner aud himself as officers Mr.. Brooks
worried through the often mentioned stock transsc-
tlon at Stayner's house In Brooklyn without gaining
a great deal Then he bothered the witness. who's,
memory was becoming more and more shaky. about
his second visit TO Cincinnati aud his return to New-
York in the company Of Ives with $500 shares. Tha
tantalizng nature OF his replies 10 that part OF thd
examination may be gathered from the following,
Q.-Do yoa recollect who broughS these certificates
Q.--Could you say thai Mr.. Ives did, Al would
Q.-Could you swear that he did Al could
not
you first saw them in New-Yorkl Al never saw them
in any ones possession In NeN-f9rh
No. sir; until they were taken there by Mr. Ives or my|
q. ohe Recordcrl-Did you see them in New.YOrki
o.~Therei AIT No. 90 Broadway.
O. Dir. BIooRe~Who put them into your possession
at no 06 Broadway Al don't know:
them Al may have had them in my pocket, %
may have had them , In my hand no,
Q.-You didn't carry them from Cincinnati in yous
hand, did YOU AmCertany &c, 'h m not o,r ,o...s,,o -.
No. 9G broadway, on what part Of your person were
theyl An my hand
"
your clothing, or your yase, or what or did soms
one put them into your hand Al don't know.
recOllect any OF those crcumstancesi Al mean To
O. Are you familiar with tho transfer Of stocki
Odd you transfer all the stock Of this railroad
company from the time of your election secretary
and treasurer to the time of your reslgnationi A
Q.-Dd you ever know another instance in all your
experience where stranger In another city gave "a
million doals worth Of stock to take away aud have
transferred A-NO. sir
1t was in the afternoon session that Mr.. Brooke
threw bis "bg bombs" lie had got the witness ID
tell Of his arrest and 10 recount Of the events
that had happened shortly before and after It, Thesa
included the taking of the testimony of Woodruff In
several suits. In regard 10 this Mr.. Brooke asked
and answered follows:
Q.-Were you, among other examinations, examined
In the suit OF Albert Netter against ChrislopheH
Meyer, Henry >. Ives and George IL stayneri A.
do you recollect the date of that examinationi
Q.~Your first examinationl A.--rhe first one
| ecollect time In December, 1883.
Q.-You were examined first by Judge Harmon on
the first of December 1881 Al am not positive
Q.-You know it was in December, 1855 49,
That Is near "a | can locate II.
Q.-Iou were then examined by Judge Harmont
Q.-And you were cross examined by Judge Ramsey
were you nOtl A-lcs, sir.
Q.Sf shall now read from your testimony; "Mr,
Meyer frequently came into my Office lie also saw
>.
ask me about the condition of the stock, whether
shere were any transfers made, and in whose name,
asked me for a list OF the stockholders which / got
him. Among other things recollect that upon look
Three with quite large blocks of stock for instance
block standing in the name Of Thomas Moore. lie
asked me who Thomas Moore was. AMI IL that stock
was portion OF the stock owned by the pool, or
syndicate don't know which word he used TO which
/ replied that il was and he came 10 me one day
and asked II would make him out list OF tho
holders Of stock represented in the pool ! told
A. ~otId a. m "A
you remember that you so testified Ia that SUIT A.
o.-You knew Christopher Meyerl A.-Yes, sir.
Q.-You knew him as director or 'toehhoider III
0.EXnd to what pool or syndicate do you referr
Q-You say you do remember tesefyag at that
time in that mannerl Ayes, sir.
Q-Up the time OF your 50 testffyinS no proceed.
ings had ever been begun against youf A-fesi
o-what proceedings A.-stayner, Ives and myl
self indicted In Cincinnati
Q-With respect to tho inquiry into the Meyer 80.
tate Al don't think t was on that specified
dwell, no proceedings had been commenced
against you herei A.-No, sir.
Q.--And you had been to Cincinnati and mot ma.
Indictment, hadn't youl Al did not meet IT.
not called upon 10 do SO. ,-,
(The Recorder Did you get outD Al never ned:
went court, and the District Attorney simply tod
get out. lie did not want me, ana wsnt ', hone3
Q.-was that what the DistrictAt'orney tola youf
opSow have you told all that the Distriet-A Attori
ney saf 10 you upon that occasion A.-No, or.
Q.-Te the balance. Al wOuld not ilhe % -.
Q.-wcI, we would prefer you to. A'-hiS language
o.IWeI, probably the object wasn't A-Thanks.
Here the witness repeated the language used bs
the DistrictAttOrney.
Q.-Have you given all the language empioyedt
was NOT the word lying applied to your Al
did not hear It. ,,,-.,.. 49,.
told YOU thatl Al certainly did
Q-And the Ives and otayner uiar IN Whlcn yov
wer, a defendant, was progressing A.-fes, air. t
o-And they acquitted A-1es. SIR
0-Is IL not the fact that your last testimony IN
| ,baf FIRST Netter proceeding on January Ia, and
| tbat Won were arrested In February Al think 10
! q. Then you were arrested next month"; Ayes.
| sir: February, isoS. . -, 49,,
| O-After YOU were arrested, you went % no Met.
md Mr. pArker and thOse gen.