Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-03-14

also swore that he never agreed to take
any stock in the paper. At this point
he was turned over to Judge Fitzgerald
| for cross-exsmination. Under this ordeal,
which is always more or less trying when
Fitzgerald gets his mental processes at
| work to probe for truth. Savage said he
never was sent for by Boyce or by any
one who claimed to act for Boyce. He
went of his own volition to the Tribune
Office.
objection was made to this line oi
procedure bv Mr.. Stevens, and Mr.. Fitz-
gerald said he wished to show that the
prosecuting witness was at that time
keeping his ears open for rumors ol
some such publication concerning him.
self. Mr.. Stevens replied that he
did not care whether that was true OF
false. 1t had nothing to do with the
question whether Boyce got $50 to sup
press the story.
Mr.. Fitzgerald said he did not propose
to 90 into the truth or falsity of the
statement as to the payment of the $50
that be would show Savage went there Of
his own free will, and acted of his own
volition all through. Boyce did not
seek him. He sought Boyce.
The court decided that the inquiry
was legitimate.
Savage then said he went there freely.
No one approached him for Boyce prior
to his visit to the Tribune Office. He also
stated that there were no harsh words
used on either side; that all was smooth
and serene all through. But the witness
insisted that Boyce stated that the
ef mould frnlaco tho eOE0
were paid. Boyce said his paper
stories. He said the Tribune did not
want the story. but some other paper
would unless the money we're paid
Boyce said he would exert his influence
to prevent this.
Mr. Fitzgerald asked him if he had
told o. A. Stevens a day or 30 after all
this that it was all right, that he had
paid Boyce $50, but that it was volun-
tary matter, that no threats had been
made. Savage denied making such
statement. He did talk with Stevens,
and told him he gave $50 to keep the
story out of the paper, aud Stevens told
him he was a fool, that it was black
mailing scheme. The witness stated
that he might have said he had paid the
money and that ended it.
Savage was then asked about conver.
sation alleged to have taken place with
w. T. Price in Ried's saloon, on New
High street, February 2, 1890, to the ef-
feet that he wanted to be reelected, and
that if Boyce would support him in the
convention he would not push this prose-
cution. The witness confessed the meet.
ing. and that he had some conversation
with Price, but claimed that the way it
was put here was not as it took place.
Savage was then questioned as 10 con-
versation he had with w. t. Williams,
Esq, February 19th, after taking drink
together on Court street. 1t was pretty
substantially the same as that with Price,
and Savage denied that it was as stated
by Judge Fitzgerald. He ackno wledged
that he had some such conversation with
Williams, but that he did not say he
wished he was out of this G. d. case,
or that he would have it dismissed if
Boyce would support him in the conven
ton, or that he was forced into it by
others.
Here further discussion took place be-
tween the attorneys, in which Judge
Fitzgerald said he would show that this
was not a prosecution but a persecution,
and that there was com bination behind
this witness of the mortal enemies OF
Boyce for the purpose of running
that person. He said Savage was q
catspaw raking chestnuts out of the
fire for the benefit of the enemies of
Boyce. The inquiry then took the trend
of showing that Savage had been a
prisoner In the hands of Detective Marsh
for the last ten DAYS. lest he should run
away and leave the case. The proeecut-
ing attorneys took the ground that that
too cut no figure in the case, that if they
feared witness might run away they
had a right even to put him in Jail to
hold him Savage acknowledged that he
had paid Stevens 500 to go into the case
to prosecute Boyce. An attempt was
made to show that this money came
from another source, but that was not
permitted.
o. A. Stevens was then pat on the
stand, who told of Boyce's coming to
him and asking him to get the details
of story against Savage. He was city
editor of the Tribune and demurred at
first about doing this sort of work, which
he thought was not legitimate journalism.
He did. however, get some details,
which he commune ated to Bovce. After
Savage had been to the Office, Stevens
asked Boyce about the affair, and the
answer was: "Oh Savage has gone
away happy. The story does not GO"
Here the court took recess until this
morning.