Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-07-04

pany. was also interesting himself in be-
half OF Mr.. Massey at that time. lie
continued by saying that the OBJECT OF
the defence In Offering this testimony was
TO point out to the court that Mr.. Mas
sey was then represented by his FRIENDS
and agents as iii subject for charity,
and for that reason should be given the
Office of Superintendent. and that in less
than three months afterward he APP
peared as a rich man. Mr. Wise went
on TO say that the statements OF these
representatives of or managers for Mr.
Massey could be contradicted by the
plaintiff.
Mr. Wake OF Mr.. Massey's counsel
made quite a forcefu argument In con-
nection with this mattT. taking the
ground that Mr.. Massey could not be
bound or In any way held responsible for
any statements not made in his MAS
sey's presence
Ex-Judge Heath addressed the Court
upon the difference In law between repre-
sensations and admissions.
Mr.. Samuel W. Sm1ll took hand in
the legal tilt. He argued that NJ. Mas
sey. In such a political canvass, must
have known that these alleged managers
were making these representations about
him. lie said that such statements could
not possibly have escaped Mr.. Massey 5
attention.
After some further argument had been
made upon this point, Judge Prentiss de,
cided the matter. He said that n had
arrived at his decision with great heslta-
ton. The peculiar circumstances sur
rounding the case made the question one.
the Judge regarded. proper to be asked
and to be answered.
TESTIMONY RESUMED.
The question was then read, and the
witness replied:
II remember il was urged that while
Mr. Massey had no acquaintance WIN
the educational system Of the state, ne
was man of executive AFFINITY ana W"ulu
make a good Superintendent OF schoois'
His service TO the Democratic party IN
the big Four legislature OF 1ssl-R was
urged as a reason why the party should
confer the nomination upon him, and II
WINS further urged that he was getting
old and was poor. and had POSSIBLY no
means of supporting himself l doh |
remember the form in which the question
of his poverty was urged, but II was
urged as one reason why something
should be done for him; and another rea-
son was that If he did not get something
at the hands Of the Democratic party ne
would give the Democratic party trouble.
Counsel for the plaintiff here interrupted
the witness. and moved to strike out the
answer, or so much thereof as had been
given: whereupon the answer was read
over To the Court who decided that II
was competent.
The witness then continued: II do not
know whether these representations came
from Mr. Parish or which ones cam-
from him. ] had conversation or two
with Mr.. Parish myself. But they were
the arguments used by the advomtes OF
Mr. Massey's election in the lobby of the
hotel and around the Legislature day
or two preceding the caucus. Some OF
the advocates were personal friends anu
others were supporting him (Massey) be
cause they thought ii was polite TO DO so.
| believe / stated did not recollect any
particular speeches in the caucus-f /
did not. / do now. I do not recollect who
nominated Mr. Massey. or the tenor OF
their speeches. The gentleman whose
claims | was advocating al the time With
drew from the contest the night of the
caucus. and ] supported Mr.. James o..
Shepperd. of Fluvanna."
MOVED AGAIN TO STRIKE OUT.
Counsel for the plaintiff moved to
strike out the whole of this answer
on the same grounds and II was argued
bv counsel The Court overruled the
objection and allowed the answer to
stand. to which ruling the court counsel
excepted.
was Mr.. Massey present at the caucus
or in Richmond about the Hobbies of the
hotels during this discussion which you
have testified about?" was asked
IL can't say: | have no recollection OF
having seen him at the time" replied
,he witness.
Counsel for the plaintiff again renewed
their motion to strike out the answer, as
Mr. Massey's presence was not shown.
rhis was sustained.
do you know the general reputation
of MIR. Massey for honesty and truthful
ness" asked Mr.. Wise.
Eyes. sir; l think do" replied Mr..
Flood
Us it his political reputation or his
personal reputation that you are speak
ing Off"
II am acquainted with his personal and
political reputation. both.
Can you say you know his general re-
putation as a man Of honesty and truth
fulness?"
Eyes, sir can
"Will you state what that general re-
putation is?"
wen, sir; would say it was very
bad"
rom your kIlON ituet vi lIt Etiti II
reputation of John y. Massey for honesty
and truthfulness. would you believe him
under oathg'
where he was interested"
Yes" replied counsel.
IL would not" replied Mr.. Flood"
How long were you in the Legisla-
ture of Virginia."
''In the House of Delegates from 1887
to 1891: and have been in the Senate from
that time to the present"
HIS BROTHER-IN-LAW.
Mr.. Flood, being cross-examined by Mr..
Nicely. the following ensued:
what relation. II any. do you bear tc
Mr. r.. H. Byrd. one Of the defendants
in this suit
Il am his brotherfn-law."
How long have YOU been a voter"
"Since 1856"
state whether or not during that tins
you have voted for the plaintiff. MIR. Mas
sey, for any public office for which he has
been nominated?'
Certainly / voted for him"
"Have you voted for him with suct
knowledge of his personal and political
character as you now possess
u have"
"And you voted for him in spite OF
that?"
II voted for him as the nominee Of h
political caucus in which l participated
and which bound me to vote for him
whatever his character was"
"You stated just now that you had the
position Of Attorney of the Common.
wealth in the county of Appomattox?
Eyes. sir
When were you last candidate for
that position?'
In the past election-the recent elec.
ton"
ssWith what result ~