The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1889-09-19
"A BCOUNDREL.
WOODRUFF ADMITS THAT ne PEA
JUNEp HIMSELF IN THE WEE CASE

ns Tells usw he Was Made Partner aud
Afterwards Asked 10 hssirn-'iiis
Memory Vsry Daaelsnt on Important
roiA,s--Deniss That lie Wa Prem
issd Ms Trssdoa n he Made csr,aia
hlatsmsata
Nav YoRK, Sept lS,--Mr Woodruff
continued his testimony In the Ives oase,
lie atAtod that lao became acquainted
with Ives In casual way and aubae'
quenily enteFed his employment Tho
business OF the firm consisted OF the
buying and selling OF stocks and bonds,
In tbs spring Of 1884 one day lvea sur
prlsed Woodruff by taking him by tho
lapel of hia coat aud blandly informing
him that he was partner, 10 receive 10
per cent OF tho profits, lle said he was
ordered 10 become a partner. lilo had 70
comply or leave Ives employ, The
name OF tho firm remained the same,
Henry 4. Ives n Co, Witness stated his
duties were 20 obey lyea, and that he
never did anything Of Importance with
out instructions from hla employer In
December, 1880, tho witness was re-
quealed 10 resign from the firm, This
was al the time that Doremua and Stay
ner appeared on tho scene, and Oh II
appeared Woodruff was dlataateful 10
stayner. Ives then made Woodruff his
confidential clerk with salary. When
Lawyer Brook endeayOred 30 touch the
witness upon the subject OF the Clneln'
matt trip Tor the purpose Of gObbllng up
tho Cincinnati, Hamilton and Dayton
railroad, Woodruff memory completely
| failed him,
Witness then described the apartments
OF tho cOmbine at the 81 Nicholas
hotel In Cincinnati, stating that ho had
FREQ accesa 10 all tho Tooma lie was
present AT the meeting Of directors
witness PreyarioatsG
Witness then preyarloatod somewhat
ah 10 the Journey from. Cincinnati TO
staynera hOuae In Brooklyn with the
books and aeala OF tho company, and
was severely rebuked by the lawyers for
his apparent ahortneaa 'of memory,
Then enaued o repetition OF the story
Woodruff told about what tranapired al
Stayners house. On being asked what
became OF tho certificates after all the
alRnlng had been completed by Ives and
Btayner, Woodruff replied ~ believe
they remained ON tho table, but don't
fully remember Then for about hftoen
MINUTES after tho above testimony
Woodruff did not know anything, He
did not know when he left the house or
how he got 10 Newark or when he ar.
nyed In Cincinnati, and above all he did
not know how tho lawyers should be al'
lowed 10 bore hidn at ALL
wIlml PERJURY Admittsd.
Attorney Brook nnauceeashlly en-
deavorod 10 induce Woodruff 10 admit
THAI he was very drunk ON the day that
Ives q Co. assigned, Tho witness por.
aLstontiy denied this and said that he had
never boon drunk On the day OF the
AAsignment no had taken the Cincinnati,
Hamilton and Dayton transfer book
home, where he kept II until four or llyo
days aftor his arrest, when he turned II
over 10 AauistAnt Diatrict Attorney
lnrker. H0 stOutly denied that no had
boen promlOcd bis freedom II he made
certain statemonta. Lawyer Brook thon
read Woodruna testimony, taken In Cin-
cinnat, In tho ault OF Meter against
Meyer, Ives and Staynor Referring TO
oortain portions Of that evidence Mr.
Brook asked the witness II he had made
tho atatements contained therein Wit
meas an0wered ~ did,
"And whom you mado those state
ments," continued Mr. Brook, ''yop
knew you were committing wilful per-
juryy"
~ did, again replied the witness.
The spectators in the court room were
astOnlahed at the cool ofrontery OF tho
witness, but the latter remained un-
moved while admitting the faleity OF his
testimony In the Cincinnati case,
Dental from ths District Attorney,
Lawyer Brook continued 10 cross.ex-
anime tho witncss concerning his sworn
statements In previous trials, and Wood
ruh cody admitted thai many OF these
statements were false. Mr., Brook then
stated 30 the Jury that Woodruff had
bOen assured Of immunity provided he
would turn stato's evidence. The dis
triot attorney promptly pronounced this
statement IA false In every particular
In order 10 show that Woodruff wps
not IN suoh mortal dread Of lves as he
pretended to be, letter from Woodruff
10 Ives VIVA read, In which the former
had declined 10 meet Ives 10 Talk mat
tors over after tho frat arrest Of Ives.
Woodruff also admitted that upon
lves' instruction ho (W0odruh) had
just beforo IVOl' arrest as0ured Ives
lawyers, ''upon hig honor MS o gentle
man, that there had been nothing
wrong In any OF lves' transactions, This
had been done because Ives wished 10
deceive his own lawyers The cToes-ox-
animation OF tho witness then cloeed.
ContiAues 20 Perlurs himself
Assistant District Attorney Parker
them questioned Woodruff concerning
his statement that his Cincinnati niii-
davit was false Witness said the Gin
oinnah evidence had been dictated by
Mr.. Ives and was entirely false, Refer
ring 10 the forgery Of Meyers initials by
Ivea, witness said Ives had committed
this forgery and had promised that any
thing 20 be made out Of II would DO
| divided between Nettur, Stnyner, Wood
ruff and himself. Witness said that
although ho had acted ms secretary Of
the railroad company, he had never read
the byslaws OF the company. A mo-
mont after making this statement ho
admitted that II was false. He con-
tinued 10 perjure himself in this way for
some time 10 the utter nstonishment OF
the court and jury In reply 10 q ques-
ton by ono Of the jurors Woodruff said
he was member OF the First Dutch
Reformed church Of Newark, N, j., and
had been so for fourteen years.
Robert d. Smith, assistant cashier, and
Theodore NJ. Nevins, cashier Of tho firm
OF Ives & Co., then testified ns 10 the
methods Of that firm. N0vins stated
that Ives had instructed him TO credit
tho Cincinnati, Hamilton and Dayton
no money for the same had been received
|