New-York tribune., 1890-03-22
MEEKS DENIES 1T ALL. -.
HE CONTRADICTS PREVIOUS TESTIMONY IN
THE FLACK CASE.
EX-JUDGE FULLERTON BLAMES JUDGE BOOK
STAVER FOR ALL THE TRoUBLE-THE
CASE LIKELY TO GO To THE
JURY TODAY

Unless there Is some unlocked for delay. the Fack
conspiracy will go to the jury some time ms
| afternoon. This was the promise madc "heh inc
court adjourned early last evening Witnesses Tor thc
defence occupied the greater part OF yesterday y
dozen or moro testified to the previous good char'
actcr and high standing" Of the defendants and an
unsuccessful effort made to get in testimony re-
sarding Mrs. Fack's habits
Joseph Mccts. the referee in the original divorce
proceedings testified in his own behalf. In all the
important particulars his testimony was directly OPP
posed to that of Mrs. Flack. benjamin Wright ana
! those who called by the prosecution.
The court will open half an hour earlier this morn
ing that all the evidence may be given In time Tor
| the summing up and the judges charge sheriff FIacN
and his son WIFI will doubt be called to testify
| for themselves.
Ex Judge Fullerton made the opening speech for
the defence \ more powerful plea from him in be
half of his clients was expected and the manner IN
which his address delivered seemed TO surprise
all who listened to it. lie spoke less than an hour
! and confined himself mainly to the public character
OF Fack before the exposure giving in detail his lf,
as husband and father. lie also spent considerable
energy in describing divorce law in this state and
undcr what condition one be obtained. lie said
in part:
the DEFENDANTS by tho advice % counsel. have until
now kept Of the ne-papcrs Il was wise for them
| =, 10 do | npment you and himself a. well that
thcr ha. been produced this trial the statement made
b, Mr. Fack before the Grand Jury % this city That
was most extraordinary history. 1t revelation 10
YOU and to many. James A. Flacks public life j. well
KNOWN but which he suffered in his own home 'nd
In hi, own family has never been known until this time
I IN some way other. wh.h cannot now b. eNt'm'd
| She fell into bad habits She longer the WIFE,
! and she neglected domestic duties. Many times In
these long years Mr.. rlack returned home to ind the
wife whom he had loved lying helpless the floor drunk
! That continued from year to year. E'non~anc'
, was In vain. II. had hom" and no wonder that he
went away from her lie would give her the FURNITURE
! lac. viN hor "A dollars
| and her would live with her. There would De a
home for her and there would be amp" provision for All
She of ne. She accepted the conditions Ih-
DistrlcAttnuey would have yOu b"cS" that this jnr}
believe tha, this hcarc,- turned hi, WIFE out into
the world without any provisions FOR lf"
Mrs Flck says -hc did not read the papers bnt
think that the Judge viii charge that all Of hcr test,
mony shall wholly di-creditel. TGtre j. no doubt
about that many times on The witness stand she coa
mittod perjury
When the decree Of divorce taken down to JUDGE
pool,a,.r by the referee he made objections TO IT,
rp to this time everything regular. But Judge
rook>tsyor TOOK hs head To make objection t. that
divorce fic lat right TO do this t' had no right
{, lntorpose such obecton All of thc ni-ch" winch
followed arose - the unJu-tihab. action o; Judge
! Eook.,avor.
Tho first witnc-s called by the defence susan "
Capc,. q half sister Of Mr. FlacN All that she was
| allowed 10 te-ff, 10 was her knowledge OF fia'h
character. The defence tried hagi 10 get from "r
something REGARDING Mr.. Fack's habits. ETJnige
Horace Russell made strong appeal 70 De allowed 10
get this tcsfimou, on the records He said that he
! wanted tu prove that Mr.. flack was An habiiual
drinlari. and that thi, impaired h'r memory ana
t-nhfuno,- Every effort 10 get before the jury the
testimony - NJ. Fl1ck'- habit, Vac stopped bl
ihe rullnr- II thc Judge.
General ,,cor-, 20. Wius1tc tho VOL known lawyer.
w. called lv tie defence. Ills testimony was mainly
| made mp of opinions e. The regularity Of the
proceeding, followed in obtaining the divorce
u wa- common thing f,r referee, 10 - to the houses
~ vtns-~- and take testimony a. well a, for noiar.e'
public To- - TO houses take the afdavs Of people.
In ,a.c, where there was only attorney it woild
no, h. wrong fur the defendants attorney to take tn,
statutory affidavit oi the defendant.
The Rcy Dr. Edwin Gilbert. formerly rector Of the
Protestant Episcopal Church ~ the Holy spirit. va,
allied bv Nc,l~s attorney. Ne testified to thc good
character and high standing of Meois. George II.
Troop who knew Flach also testified % his good
.hilnotcr
Then followed number - Witnesses who testified
t. the good characters and reputation, u the defend
ant, previous t. the exposure Of the
Flack case. Martin II. Townsend, Thomas
r. stewart. Charles Andrews John /. VI. Hunt.
rhcophu, Pratt and Nelson smith gave testimony OF
thi- Mind.
Just I,f0rc the recess judge Barrett delivered
short loctur. to the member, Of the jury. he sad
that De had NOT dail' admon,hed them to their
ohl cation and duty, and on that account. perhaps
that had caused some Of them to Doc L., careful IN
| talking about the cae than they should have been.
lie told them To avoid commenting upon the o,i-
dcncc Discussing the picture, Of them which had
appeared iu TN. pilcg- Juror ,rl>-c hu>hci deer Is
and sank Back il his chair at the judge word.
>ner the recess. "a long string of wlinc--r, were
examined a., tp Ilack', cha;actcT. They wcre
stephen y rcucii, Charlie, Jcaku, president Of the
! Eastern National Bank. Of brooklyn Jam, stevens.
Charles =. sheridan. Edward VI. GcdncS and Nionlo
-loic. Hcior' each witnc,, left tho stand Colonel
I tf O.
know ANYTHING of rach, dual lf'.1 Each one
answered n thc negative.
lr-adwcu Clcvcliud. Mr.. Flck', attorney in hcr
ll,oc, proceedings against rlaci. called hv
Mcck,'- lawyer. lie Wa, quick IN his answer, and
made them brief and tcr-c. The examining lawyer
tac! 10 ct Mr. Cleveland to tell all
ihout the conference, which benjamin Wrsh'
him. Judge Barrett sustained the objection Whi,n
va. raised hy NJ. Gof. He did testify however.
that Mr. Wright told him that he signed the compain'
md the affidavit of regularity ON the same dly. The
defence cndcavoicd to get tc~t.mou, upiuccd prov
ing Mr. iaok wfrl pcrIurrr because -h" first t,
uncd when ON the witncss stand that Mr. Cleveland.
49, her lawyer. had not begun such suit. >Ac after
ward corrected tins. and Judge Barrett would not allow
the question t. ie answered Oh that account. rhc
witness did s.c her write her signature to the hil
of complaint which her lawyer had drawn up she
denied that thl, wa her signature when te>inNn-.
Ms' Ea-'l. 'g nos wr PH.ns s "ng , an .'Ins
c,lird ih"i ne Took Mr, r fi,'" "%'iN" % ,s n'
divor,c proceedings, told hi. old story
II having been called from hi, dc,i,
ly "A hoy who told him that " WIZ Flack wanted d
him. and of gong with Young fach to hol~e
I'm East llsty seventh i. and taking the oath OF
woman whom he saw there. He account, for the flct
that the used 10y him In signing his name and that
used by Mr., Flack different on the ground that
he carrie, a ,tylographic pen and he signed hi, name
with that. lie did not read the paper 10 Mrs. la,A.
but simply pat formal oath 10 her 10 which she
| as-cntcl.
Mis-, Mary \. rlack and Mrs Annie Micr
called 20 testify to Mrs Fack's habits. As the
| case of susan VI. ,opcs their evidence not ad