The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1896-08-20
MAJOR WRIGHT's TRIAL
The Crowd That Packs the Courtroom A.
tests That Interest Is Hot Waning.
A NUMBER OF WITNESSES EXAMINED
And the Attorneys Indulge In Enter
thinning TiIts a Hard Figh, Oyor
tho Introduction nv Evidence of
Three Years Records of the Onicc
ofCommissiOner Of the Revenue.

Suffolk. Va, Aug. l9.-(SpeciaD-Wlt
tenaclty and endurance worthy of a
more ennobling object, the spl ctators In
Judge Kllby's tribunal to-day clung 10
their positions of vantage and watched
the proceedings with an intense interest.
MANY lined up In the windows and 9th.
ers were strung along the ratings like
pirds at roost, but the majority were
unable to secure seats of any Kind and
were beyond the rails, craning their
necks for an occasional glimpse of the
LAWYERS and witnesses. They were con
Sidered lucky even to have standing
| room inside.
This was the third day of the trial and
was occupied In the examination OF
witnesses. nearly all OF whom appeared
anxious to be careful. almost to the eX-
| tent that they were nervous and suspi-
cious OF being caught In u trap, and the
severity OF the cross-eXaminations was
| Justification OF their endeovors to
Keen their whole wits with them They
were the commemorative Witness $,
and they went on the stand with some
knowledge of the ability of the couns
for the defense in handling a witness.
Clerk Conner read the proceedings Of
Yesterday. after which n loll-call evil
denced the fact that all the jurors were
present. though one of them was n little
Late. The Judge and attorneys re on
hand promptly. scr '
| Colonel Bovkin renewed his motion that
all witnesses except the one on the stand
/
perts were excepted from the p; ov!siuns
OF the motion. MIR. Holland stated that
Ethere was no objection to witnesses for
tthe defense remaining inside and all
others We're excluded from the room 9
John Il. Lotzia, whose examination
was begun yesterday. was recall a.
Mr. Holland-"Have you li4t OF tax
IaGeounts?"
| Witness-"YeB."
He then explained that Major Wright
| mad turned him civ rhpS
I which he did not think of when cross
|examined by Colonel Boykin yesterday.
Witness, In response to questions.
here Identified tax accounts and paving
/ huls handed to him by Major Wright.
Tax books were also identified.
l Colonel Boykin-'tYou make expiana-
ton that you have remembered six
pouches that Major Wright turned over
| TO you In addition to what you said yes
i terdav. Have you now, after thinking
i over the matter. given a complete list
OF all accounts which Major Wright
surrendered TO you?"
1 Witness-"Y all that know Of"
Colonel Boykin (produclng a paper)-
l PLEASE examine that paper and say
whether 1t is your receipt"
The witness read receipt signed by
himself for SI9 worth OF cemetery bonds,
band, followed ii by u statement that he
considered the bonds worthless. or
i Colonel Boyk!n-"Then you omitted sin
Your statement $40 worth of bond 4?'i
| The witness made further eNplana
ton and said that he had overlooked
! the matter. s',+l
Colonel Boylsin-"Then Major Wright
is entitled TO a credit OF S79?" ,-, 10 =
4 iWitness-"Yes." lft+ lsUE|
! Colonel Boykin-"You stated yesterday
that you qualified on August 8 or 6. 1905.
Before whom did YOU uual!fy?'' -
| Witness--"The Town Council"
Colonel Boyk!n-"You did not settle
with Major Wright till your qualinca-
tion?"
Witness-"No"
In YOUR statement that you qualified be-
fore the Council? Was 1t not the Coun-
" Court?'
Witness-'tMy bond was approved by
the Council. ] also qualified before the
County Court"
In compliance with the Common
wealth's Attorney. witness read n long
list of paving bills among the papers
which were marked
w l.. Mcleod was recalled and identi-
HE'D stacks of papers and documents
which had been in his possession. They
were nut in the custody of Clerk Come:
who will label the lot and keep tn m tn
fhev are needed as evidence. The defense
gave notice that they might object TO the
admission of many OF those papers as
iev!dence.. but 10 save time they were filed
Iawav till eded.
The records OF three years Of the Com
missioner of Revenue which were not
uroperlv authenticated were then dis
cuss d.
Col. Boylln argued against their in
production. claiming that they were not
properlr authenticated, as they were not
certified to before justice OF the y ace
as required by law. He said that their
validity did not justify an Introduction
as evidence. and they were not adm.ssi-
BILE as evii nee.
Mr. Holland claimed that he proposed