New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-03-18
BOOKSTAVER TESTIFIES'
A POOR WITNESS IN THE FLACK CASE.

THE JUDGE HAS BAD MEMcRY-HE TELLS
ABOUT THE APPOINTMENT OF REFEREE.
Whom Jndre Barrett took his scat IN the oyer
ana rermipcr court Yesterday morning the court
,oom was packed with inqusitive people VINO ca'h'
I. ere 10 listen TO the testimony onered III INC ian
divorce case Among the listeners were nall
dozen women. who sat throughout the morning ann
afternoon sessions, expecting no DOUBT 'iA' y"
Ilack would he called. They were disappoihteo'
however a. Mrs Fiack was not cailcu' 0"e "'''
he the most important witness whom the prosecution
will call to-day. At various times curing tlc ua'
many wellknown came INTO ire oou' 'loo"'
20 listen 10 the testimony. EXstate SENATOR 'o"'
Foley. who defended ex-Alderman McQuade IN sara
tea Couutv last summer watched the proceeding
carefully Ex-Judge Horace Russell and his legal
assistants were early in the courtroom hN-'uuee
Fullerton John H. Bird and Phiip carpenter "no
arpcar as attorneys and assistant COUNSEL 'o"''
him shortly before the hour when the court was
opened Assistant Distric, Attorney Gof. who has
h,en the active attorney for the prosecution TOOK
immediate charge of the witnesses examined al"
conducted the examination. District Attorney rel
lows assisted him with suggestions and iue'uohs'
Mr. COTS work on the case yesterday did not ma
terially aid the prosecution. Although h"eh oeS"'
mony of damaging nature was produced IL was 'o'o
or less q repetition of that which the Judiciary 'ol-
mittee Of the Assembly brought out under the ski
and Assemblyman Ackcr, the chairman OF the com
mittee The testimony obtained was preliminary 10
mare important evidence which will be brought on' DC
fore the case has been conducted many uays i"'no''
The prosecution secured the testimony OF coh''ueio'0
number of witnesses the most prominent among "ho
VAS Judge Bookstavcr. who granted the decree VI
divorce. His testimony listened to with the
greatest interest and attention. He was the poorest
w.tpess called during the day. His voice was weak
md none outside of range of few feet couiu he'''
or understand what he said.
The other witnesses questioned during the day were
Nathan = Jarvis, a clerk in the Court OF SoM'lio"
Pleas when the decree of divorce was granted Ma
tfahiel Jarvis. jr. who was clerk OF the court
George A. Moultou the senographcr OF the vim DIS
trct Court: BENJAMIN Wright, the attorney who TOOK
the place of Ambrose Mcneil Mrs. Fack's lawyer :;
Henry D. Hamilton CLERK in the once OF EIorlusc l.
Gerry who testified to William Flacks wrl'hs
rorntv Clcrl, Edward F. Reilly who testified regard
ing the political association between flach
and Mecas, and also TO the election OF
Flack a. County Clerk and sheriff Au
eu,tus h. Eoeder. reporter, VINO hrsV
Informed Mrs. Flack that she had obtained d'or'e
from her husband: Joseph ID. Camp, the young en-
ploye of Flack son. who served the houces Vi '"0
tut for divorce on Sheriff Flack' commissioner
tilroy, who was Mr. Flacks deputy when Fack was
County Clerk and sylvester A. Nolan, the law CLERK
Of the Supreme Court. who testified to the taxing oi
Camps AFFIDAVIT Of service.
When Judge B0Obstaver was called there was a
GOOD deal of excitement in the courtroom me
spcctators eraned their necks and stood on tipoc To
catch glimpse of him. His testimony ala ho'
differ materially from his sworn statement ana 'e,u'
mony given before the committee of the Association
of the Bar of the City Of NewYork. lie said that
lie had known Mceks for fifteen years. lie Knew
that Judge Mcneil counsel for sheriff fls'h'
lie had had conversation with Judge Mcneil al
social gathering. 1t in regard 10 the duties OF
Judge Mcneil counsel for the Sheriff. Judge
Mcneil told him that Mrs. Flack had threatened to
begin all action for divorce against the sheriff.
Judge Mcneil had said that the facts could not be con
troverted by the sheriff in substance. that the sheriff
had no defence. No mention had been made as TO
the probable time that the action would be begun OF
What the quality Of the evidence would be.
Did You appoint Joseph Mceks referee IN
any case but this - was asked.
Il did not. suggested his name to me
before this case ever came up Hundreds Of names
have been suggested to me.
fiends. When he talked with Mcneil about the cas-
at the social gathering nothing was said about inc
testimony to be produced There was Trouble bc
that an action possible. lie did not ask any
questions about the testimony. and nothing Wa ,ad
10 lin abcut the appointment OF referee. lie liHn
never appointed Neehs a. "a referee in case before
making him the S referee in this case or the
stances which Influenced him In making the appoint
lie =, a S not WSsa "ne ahea Ul hs "
contemplated action for divorce no suggestion Wa
made as 10 who the referee should be. His memOr,
was extremely poor. lie conld not tell how many
times he sat in special Term during the summer o.
1850. lie cOald rot remember whether
during u January and February Of that year, but h
thought that he had Mcneil first presented IN
papers in the divorce suit 10 him. lie could not re
csil just what the papers We're. They were given T.
him in open court. \ blank space was left IN IN
papers for the name OF the referee Judge BOOk-tav
cr's reeollcctions were extremely dull the poin
raised as 10 whether the papers were given 10 him a
The first second third conference with Mcneil Tn
question Of almony for Mrs Flack was discussed VIII
Meeks but no decision reached
me case will he continued to-day and on ever,
day until ii is ended.