Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-09-12
IN THE FACE OF MANY PROTESTS.
Mr.. Goldsborough Re-ESamined Before the
Rock Creek Commission.

Rock Creek Commission.
The Rock Creek Park commission to appraise
| the property continued its session yesterday.
The arguments as to the right of the govern
ment to recall Mr.. Robt II. Goldsborough to
testify in chief were concluded.
The commission said that the objection of
3lr. Albert was sustained, for they had con-
Guided that after Mr.. Goldsborough had testi-
fed in chief and his crosse Examination practi-
cally concluded they could not hear him in
chief again. He had made no request to cor
rect or explain his testimony. He may be ex-
amined as to what had been brought out
cross-examination.
Mr.. Perry gave notice that he would apply to
the court for further instructions
MIR. GoldsborougL was asked as to the Dos
Passos tracts (36 and 37) and said he had been
over them in the past few days
Mr.. Albert objected. but was overruled.
Mr.. Goldsborough was asked if he wished to
change his testimony.
Judge Wilson objected. saying that the wit
ness had been over the ground and he could
not now testify.
Mr.. Albert said it was for the witness to get
up a man and ask 10 make correction il he
desired and then take the stand.
Mr.. Conway Robinson claimed that the wit
ness could not testify from what he had learned
since his examination.
Mr.. Alert suggested that a similar question
was ruled out during Mr.. Stellwsgen testi-
mony.
Mr. Perry said what he now desired was to
ascertain what was the Judgment of the witness
after he had examined the ground.
| Mr.. Wilson argued that the government was
not entitled to testimony based upon what wit
ness had learned since his examination in
| chief.
borough felt that he had done injustice by his
| testimony.
Mr.. Goldsborough-No,s sir.
| No CORRECTIONS TO MAKE.
Commissioner Burchell asked Mr.. Goldsbo-
rough if he wished to change his testimony us
to any piece of property.
! Mr.. Goldsborough answered in the negative.
| and he explained what he had done as being at
| the request OF Mr.. Perry.
| Mr.. Perry asked if he desired to change his
testimony and Mr.. Goldsborough answered in
| the negative.
| Mr.. Wilson objected and noted al exception
saying that 1t was not proper for him to re-
| iterate.
| Mr.. Goldsborough asked to make an addi-
| ton, and after some objection and discussion
| said:
Il went over the Zepp tract as well as the
| Dos Passos-'
Several objections were made. but witness
| was allowed to proceed.
The witness continuing said that there were
two properties which ne would, If allowed TO-
| testify value little higher.
| Mr.. Perry-What properties are they?
| The owners counsel in chorus-We object.
Mr.. Perry argued that he was entitled to the
| answer.
| Mr. Atchison claimed that the government
was precluded from having two chances while
| the owners had but one.
Mr.. Perry called attention TO the owners re-
calling Mr.. Duvall and urged as a matter Of
night that he was entitled to the answer.
Mr. iagu .1 saiu II TINS witness was allowed
'is s,iiie course Gouiu DC taken WIN
o'Aers, anu tneIc was ne 'elihS "here the IN
curry "ouli emu II tiey went on IN the line
Slr. IerIy hau niarhec OUT they would not only
nav q. na,s VA. Al eourt, put year IN cour.
anu II 'ney were Competed 10 remain mere SIX
An1 ~, lns longer 'Aey "ouiu star'S 60 ueaIh.
me com liiiSslCueFs .lter consultation decided
tnaI witness could NOT specify 'Ae prcperues-
or; uolusDoroGt'h s'id mere were TWO pieces
"hich ON a comparison Win others ne "ould
put up hisner.
COMMISSIONER ns oeunerie asked IL ne desired
10 correct lis testimony.