Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-09-09

and claimed that, having made out q prima
facie case of forgery, thorough investigation
be had. The witnesses to the document were
referred to and the statement was made that
one Of them-Leonard Huyck-was now an in
mate of St. Elizabeth's insane hospital.
Frank Bowman, the other witness to the al
legged forged document, could not be found and
he seems to have no status. As to the necessity
Of examining expert witnesses in open court
there was ample precedent
In the Sharon case it was done and there
were q number Of other cases which clearly
established the necessity for such action. Mr..
Of the alleged forgery and of a signature Of
Gen. Butler made on the same dav as that on
whicq the alleged agreement was signed.
10 this proceeding Mr.. Cook strenuously OBJ
1ected and the court sustained the objection.
MR.. COOKS ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Cook said he did not propose to discuss
the question at issue in any other than regular
and proper manner, and he should pay but
little attention to the ex-parte statements made
by Mr.. Barrett Much OF the alleged testimony
referred to was irrelevant and would
be thrown out by the court
when the testimony was examined
be- allowed tbirtv Say, IN wbcb 'i e
take additional testimony; the court had also
to decide whether or not portions of the
evidence should be taken in open court
to the exclusion OF all other testimony, and
also whether the complainant should or
should not be allowed to further cross
examine Samuel Strong and 3. d. Palmer,
and those two only before an examiner. Mr..
Cook directed attention to
THE INACTIVITY OF GEN. BUTLER,
who was out at sea during the period which
should have been utilized in the taking of tes-
timony. The law favors the vigiiant
1t was Cassius who cried, "Help
IT was Gsn Butter who prserrsd the ess
breezes to the taking Of testimony and who now
comes into court and with outstretched arms
cries aloud, Help me, chancellor, or
sink" When before did counsel ever
come into court and plead for an
time set apart by order of the court in dalliance
with the sea breezes on board his pleasure
yacht.
couple Of etters on exhibit were
F cot ,nS CUOk in oonn.s Of which
were referred to as thieves by John Amber
Smith. the attorney, who was corresponding
with Butler as to certain retractions which the
Massachusetts lawyer deemed necessary
to his reputation. Another letter, writ
ten BY Butler, stated his determination
crimes" Mr.. Cook argued that if crime was
to be established in connection with the case
let it be done in accordance with established
rules OF equity practice.
GEN. BuTLza HAS THE FLOOR.
Interest in the case became more marked
when the Massachusetts, war horse arose to his
feet and shufled slowly into the aisle which con-
fronted the court. The general slowly shifted the
small chunk Of chewing gum which had kept
him busy all through Mr.. Cooks eloquence and
severity and then said, with groat delibera-
ton: The plaintiff Tor a. he called it
action on the part Of this court,
certainly for nothing unjust or unfair, for I
shouldn't get it if I did. The rules Of the
court provide for all ask. The extension of
time requested il common-the most common
examination Of witnesses in open court there
Is also rule and precedent for it." The general
then went into the history of the case from
the very beginning and showed how, through
continuous proceedings, the fees and expenses
Of the case had mounted up to a large figure.
The general went at length and with great care
into the charge that he had
LOCKED STRONG Up
in his Qhe generally Office until Strong had
signed An agreement as 10 compensation.
Nothing too bad, he declared, could be
said OF any lawyer who would commit
such an outrage upon any client. The manner
in which q compromise had been proposed
lately was related in Q clear, connected story
that was quite interesting. The general
sAiu ne uau Oeen hskeu now muCu ne Wouio
reduce his lien upon the award 50 that Strong
might have something on which to live in his
old age. To this reply was made that
Strong had fled In court the charge
that Butler had kept him in duress until
he signed the document before referred to and
that Butler would entertain no proposition to
compromise until those charges were with
drawn. Then Strong, through his attorney,
John Amber Smith, wrote TO Butler saying: II
have nothing against You; you always did
as well by me a. you knew how. did not
know that the charges You refer to
were in the answer fled In court
Il I had known Of them I would not have
signed the answer"
TIE CENTRAL MsIsrHD
that there could be no compromise until
sworn denial by Strong was on record in the
court, but when that was done he would take
wSsS he n', va: entitled IN: vndisss: n. e
said the general in effect, "and win consent
to call II square for S0,000," and Of that
smoulA the general explained, full
el6,o0o had been. advanced in cash
70 Strong By himsslt The ESQ, 900
Cook and Browning II they wanted 1t all Re-
ferring 10 the money advanced the general said
that $4,000 was for printing the testimony
taken previous 10 the award, which" said
Butler, "Strong told me Cook was trying to
cell for waste paper"
general Just about this time, for Ut this point
he took up the question Of personal vindica-
ton. His voice was low and soft for minute
or two and he made appealing gestures to the
court Then his entire dsmsanor
cHANosu IN rwnsxLIxo.
he plsksd up he dosunsss vhisA 10 alleges