Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-09-03

NoUNCEs As FoRaEp-HE ASKS TO Rave THE
NATTER INVESTIGATED IN OPEN COURT.
There viii doubtless be large attendance OF
members Of the bar tomorrow in the Equity
Court to watch the proceedings in the case Of
Butler against Strong, in which notice has been
served by Mr.. DAD. Barrett, representing
Gen. Butler, that he will move for
an extension Of time for taking
testimony in rebuttal 1t will be remembered
that Strong sued the District for work done
under the board of public works; that verdictt
were given him for various amounts, and that
two or three times the controversy was sub
mitted to arbitrators. The last board of arbi.
tration awarded him less than $50, 900. Then a
number of claimants entered suits for the pur-
pose of subiecting this award to liens.
The testimony in the case of Butler against
Strong has been taken by Albert Harper and
G. P. Montgomery as examiners in chancery,
and at a session held by the latter few weeks
ago. when MIR. Strong was under examination,
he produced paper purporting to be an agree
ment signed by Gen. Butler, which the latter
claims to be forgery.
THE DOCUMENT IN QUESTION
ia as follows:
WASHINGTON, D. O., April 8, 1885.
Samuel Strong of Washington, D. O., has this
Sd day of April, 1885, assigned to Benjamin F.
OI LCWcll, mdSS., IOTIy-S1x L0OuSdDO
and FIVE hundred and forty-nine dollars and
is 70 Be- aeduetea sa2 s,r wnlss
award made by VIM. Penn Clark Halbert E
Paine and Edward Clark out of 1924, 79S 49,
provided the above award is confirmed by the
courts, but il 1t be not confirmed by the courts
and is set aside then this assignment is null and
void and of no effect Gen. Butler shall receive
no more than his first contract called for
$4,000.
Witness: B. F. BUTLER.
L. HuYcK.
Tho notice served on Mr. Strong's counsel by
Mr.. o. D. Barrett, as solicitor for Gen. Butler,
Is that he will tomorrow, or as soon
as practicable, move, in the equity
court, for an order extending his time
for taking evidence in rebuttal for thirty
days and for an order allowing rebuttine
evidence to be given as to certain of Strong't
exhibits, and the rebutting evidence to alleged
conversations 8. d. Palmer claims to have had
with Gen. Butler at Jersey City and Paw Paw
Mich, be taken in open court
n na Tor sn order and to fansr saoe
the examiner. He alse proposes in the argu.
ment OF this motion to read the evidence OF
Strong and Palmer and that of Hon. j. Amber
Smith and Rev. j. L. Evans and to present
certain OF Strong's exhibits for inspection.
GEN. BUTLER's AFFIDAVIT.
The motion is supported by the af6davits Of
Gen. Butler and Mr.. Barrett The first sets
forth the production Of the paper by Strong
the existence of which had not been mentioned
and which Gen. Butler claims he had never
heard Of; that the conduct of the case was il
Mr.. Barrett's hands and the paper was sur,
prise to him and he had not been in
structed as to meeting it. Genera
Butler declares the paper to be
a forgery. He says that he was away at the
time it was produced on his summer vacation
and on his return he began to prepare evidence
to meet it, and he finds that it requires the TAX
ing of evidence in Massachusetts, New Yorl
and perhaps other states, and, therefore, it il
impossible to fully prepare bis reply before the
expiration OF the time. He closes And
further depose and say that the magnitude o.
the amount involved, the high crime which has
been committed by the defendant if this pape,
writing is forgery and the high crime that
am now committing in swearing that it ii
forgery il it is not render it proper that the
case should be heard in this court as far al
possible by viva yoce evidence in the presence
of the court, that the witnesses may be seer
and heard by the court and their credibility
determined and the fact settled SO that public
justice shall be properly indicated"
The affidavit OF Mr.. Barrett states his sur
prise at the production of the paper, and sayi
he never heard that Strong claimed that such
paper was in existence.