The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-11-19
Mr.. DUCE STANDS 1907 FIRE
CONTINUED from Second Page

| that / thought we were going to get rid
| OF these impartial. or Northern histories.
| and he had nothing TO say then except
that they were going TO do what was
right
| Vests going on fishing trip7
| A. No sir.
| By Mr. Lamb. sYou don't remember
whether Mr. Womack said anything
| about Mr.. Folkes, or not?
A. / do not / cannot recollect II.
! nv CAPTAIN Wise. Colonel. a great deal
| has been said about an affidavit. You
| are very positive that you have repeated
ly told Mr. Duce In the preparation of
| this Affidavit that II was to be his aida
| Wit and TO he the truth?
A. / did. time and time again. he and
| Mr.. West also.
q. The only question, them with you
| or anybody else. was as to the form In
which the truth should be expressed
was IL?
A. Yes. sir; lust az / would have done
| had those gentlemen told me n week
! before. | think we should have had an
investigation ourselves. and probably
have saved a great deal OF the trouble
we have now had. As they came TO me
| at late hour for counsel. l counseiled
them as best / could.
q. 1 understand that. What ! wanted
was TO get from you the fact that you
| impressed upon Mr.. Duce emphaticaJly
that this affidavit was TO contain the
truth as he understood II.
A. Yes, sir: so much so that In one
| OF these afdavits that was prepared,
which they showed 10 me. | said: "Mr.
Duce. from your statement TO me. ]
don't see how you can make this am
| davit." ana he agreed with me. ] said:
THAT would not be In cOnsonance with
what you said to me-.
q. Did any ono else vary from your
position in that respect?
A. Not one. not a soul. Mr.. WOodhn
was equally I'm earnest that he should
not make a mistake to extenuate what
he deemed TO be mistake on the part
OF his co-labOrer and from any desire
to please his employers.
O. Exactly. Now, Colonel you stated
one other thing. You stated that Mr..
Womack saw you. Can you fix the date?
] mean, when he had the interview with
YOU about this transaction with Mr..
West.
A. II was last Monday afternoon al
o'clock.
Q. You stated. az 7 understood you.
that Mr. Womack told you that the note
that Mr.. West gave him was not dated.
Are you positive that that was his state
ment?
A. I am very positive. but you can
get confederation of that from Mr.
Stamper. whom l had present on that oc-
caSon: but that is my memory Of it.
Q. Was not this his statement: that
the note was dated on the day IT was
In rnA
the right to rub out that date-blot II
out-and put in a subsequent date If he
should negotiate The note subsequently?
A. / believe YOU are right ] believe
he said that he had the right TO change
the date.
Q. MY reason for being particular
about this is that. perhaps. as that note
may come up. and If IL does ] want all
Of the facts as correct az possible.
O. | believe ne did say that West gave
him the right 10 change the date, as OF
the date that he had the note discounted
at Norfolk.
o. What was the amount OF that note?
A. / can't tell you. My recollection Is
that il was Sl25.
Q. Now let me see if I cannot refresh
your memory Was It not Mr.. Womack's
statement that Mr.. West borrowed sl25
paw that s125 in fifteen or twenty days;
that at the expiration of the fifteen or
twenty days, Mr.. West paid him $50 in
cash, claiming that MIR WOmack owed
him $40; that Mr. Womack said he thought
II was only $10 but Mr. West insisted
IL was ~, and that finally Mr.. Womack
consented that it was $40; and $50 and $50
mace $50: and that then he WesD gave
a note for the balance due. $l5?
A. | don't remember that at all. / did
not give In my statement all he had to
say about the transaction-only the
points in which he differed from Mr..
West
o. You do not recollect that part of it?
A. Not at all.
Q. Now. where did he say the note was
negotiated?
A. In Norfolk.
Q. DO you remember the name he men
toned?
A. lie did not tell me.
O. You are certain that he did not men
ton any names?
Q. BY Mr.. Lecky: Was the time OF that
note inserted? Was 1t for one. two or
three months. aid he say?
A. Ny recollection Of II is that he said
II was for sixty days, but l would not be
positive about it at all.
PERSISTENT QUESTIONING.
Mr.. Duce then resumed the witness
stand and was examined on several mat
ters of minor importance, after which
he was taken in hand by Captain Wise,
and put through a vigorous cross-eXami-
nation but he in no wise deviated from
the statements originally made by him.
During the course of this cross exami-
nation he admtt.1 the fact that he ha0
told Mr.. West if the latter could get the
American Boo kCompany TO give him
(Duce) 500. he would leave town, and
thus would be beyond the reach of the
Investigating Committee. that he stated
to West he was willing to do this. as he
felt he was directly responsible for the
investigation being ordered. he having
unintentionaly and thoughtlessly betray-
the confidence which West had imposed
in him. He explained that his idea was
that he would leave $75 with his family,
and he would take the remaining s25 and
go to New York and try to secure work
there
After Captain Wise had time and again
interrogated the witness on the subject
of the affidavit he had made and sent in
10 the committee before he was first put
upon the stand, the committee through
its chairman objected to any further
questioning on that line. stating that the
whole matter had been gone over, and the
witness has answered fully all the ques-
ton that had been put to him. Captain
Wise contended that the questions ne had
put to the witness were. legitimate and
rronar and that ba Ind the rfpht IN al