Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1895-05-22

swear to 1T there, but / insisted that the
affidavit should be read over to him care
fully in the Spanish language and re-
quested some one to do it, to go into the
front corner room of my office. l don't
remember who it was but think prob
ably it was Mr.. Conklin. During no part
of this time while this affidavit was being
dictated to me by Francisco Rivera and
while was debating it into English to
the stenographer was Francisco Gonzales
Borrego in the room. When they went
into the other room to translate it to him,
shortly after they had gone in, walked
ill there. They were translating it and
Mr.. Francisco Gonzales y Borrego was in
there. think he went out shortly after
wards, aud afterwards, think, if l re-
member correctly, Morrison and Valdez
were sent for. l am not certain whether
they were in the room before that time or
not. My recollection does not serve me
exactly on that point. But they we're
sent for about the time the affidavit was
sought to be translated to him. And
directed him if any mistakes should be
made in the affidavit to correct them.
My recollection is the affidavit was twice
translated to Rivera, once in the front
corner room of my Office and second
time in the back room of my office, where
Mr.. LASER, the notary public who took
the oath, had his desk. In one of these
places Mr.. Morrison and Mr.. Valdez were
present. was through both rooms from
time to time and heard them read the
affidavit to him. After it was all read
over myself asked him if the affidavit
was correct and told him if there was any
mistake in the affidavit as to the facts
that | wanted him to correct them, and
asked him if the affidavit was all true.
think some little correction was made in
it as it appears here by the insertion of a
name. He said the affidavit was correct,
| just as the facts were. lie then swore to
the affidavit before Mr.. LASER, gave it to
me and left it with me and went out of
the office. After he had gone to the door,
1 don't know whether he went out or not,
he came back to where was and he said
he wanted to put me on my guard par
ticularly. He said: All they want in
this whole TRANSACTION is to implicate you
and Antonio Ortiz" Objection by
Mr.. Crist and N otion to strike out. Over
ruled.) BY proving that we had paid
to have Francisco Chavez killed. He adj
vised me to be on the lookout; that they
were trying to get up some such evidence
against mt and Mr.. Ortiz. There was no
one present except he and myself when
he made that remark. He then left the
office leaving this affidavit with me.
81 heard the testimony of
THE WITNESS, IKE NOVEL;,
with reference to conversation had with
me at the penitentiary. l went to the
penitentiary to see Ike Novel; about the
time he testifies. l was there with refer
ence to the testimony he would give in
this case and went in the interest of
my clients. sent for him and he was
brought into Col. Bergmann's room. I
said I wanted to talk to him about what
evidence he was going to give in this
case He answered all right and asked
me what l wanted to know. l said to
him that as l understood it he had made
two statements conflicting with each
other, which were contrary to each other,
one in his evidence given before Judge
Seeds and the other in statements made
to Mr.. Spess prior toglving his evidence;
| bUdb Ia Ouo uo Lhu ulduo budboucubb WulCtL
would connect these defendants with the
killing of Chavez 10 certain extent and
in the other he had said that he knew
nothing that would connect them with it,
or words to that effect. He said it was
true that he had made these two state
ments. asked him which one of the
two was true"
Objection by Mr.. Crist. Overruled.
"He said that what he said to Mr..
Spfess was correct; what he had sworn to
was not correct, and said Mr.. Spiess
ought not to have used what he told him !;
that he was at the time he gave his evil
dence before Judge Seeds in close
place and he was trying to help himself
and he thought that by Mr.. Spiess maxi
ing use of that that he had injured him
then said to him if you'g go over there to
testify you must tell the truth without
reference to any one. And I said ARE
you going over there to testify to thing
that is not true He said, If get on
the stand and testify to what I told Mr..
Spiess, which is true, can that not be
used against me in an accusation which
might be brought against me for per-
! jury" l said yes, it can, because one
portion of your testimony used in one
place can be used against you in another
if they conflict He then said 4 have
had trouble enough and do not want to
do anybody any HARM Now he said,
'fibw can I get out of stating what I said
before Judge Seeds although that is not
true; what way can / ever 60 on the
| a. ND nj k.,N hal nd ~ r. n
oath which will help to convict mes' l
said Il don't know but one way. If you
testify you must tell the truth but you
can refuse to testify If by telling the
truth it will tend to convict you of per-
| jury And l said IF this is the case and
you want to tell the truth and you feel
that that will help convict you Of perjury
you can state to the court that your an
swer will tend to convict you of crime
and you decline to answer He said Gan
they force me to answer? | said They
can't do it if you say your answer will
tend to convict you of a crime and your
answer will be true.' He then said 1T I
get into any trouble about it what will
you do?' l said 4 will be there and I
will see that you are protected by the
court in your rights That I think is
about all the conversation as / remember.
The language have used don't pretend
is exactly verbatim but it is as near as
can now remember"
TESTIMONY THIS MORNING.
Promptly at $50 Mr.. Catron resumed
the stand for crosse xamination, gen.
orally sustaining the positions taken in
his direct examination in a lawyerlike
fashion. Touching the Rivera affidavit
incident the witness said that when he
came into his office before the prepare
tion of the affidavit he found Francisco
Rivera and Francisco Gonzales y Borrego