The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1897-04-28
He Shifts All the Blame Upon
His CO-Defendant.
SAYS TURNER TOOK THE LEAD
Represented That the Documents
Were Part of His Fathe r-in-Law's
Turner's Testimony Con-
ciudes With an Admission That He
Did Not Tell the Truth.


this morning before Justice Bradley.
The first ques ton propounded to him
was as to how he frs learned there was
a value upon the papers in the Force
collection. Counsel for the defense OBJ
jected, but the objection was overruled
The witness answered that his attention
was called to some scrap-books. He and
McElhone subsequently distracted papers
from the scrapbooks, tearing them out
bodily. They were carried to his room, but
McFlhone was the first to mutilate the
books. He also stated that until he was
informed by McElhone he had no knOwl-
edge whatever of the value OF old manu-
scripts.
several questions We're propounded at this
point, 10 which the defense objected. The
object of the queries was to identify the
roll OF the regime 1T of the artificers and the
paper noting the return of Gen Sullivan.
The court stated that the witness had
answered the questions fully yesterday,
and asked if he had obtainedany additional
light upon the subject over night.
None, that | can see, your honor" said
MI Shillington.
nat is OileuSlNey cAClditleu MI
Davis.
And there was temporary lull. 1t was
surprise, and resulted ultimately in Mr..
Davis saying, impresslvely:
I'm order to avoid any possibility Of
error in this matter, | close the examina-
ton of his witness at this point.
This was preceded by an explanation
by Justice Bradley that he did not intend
10y the suggestion made to reflect upon
Mr. Davis The witness was in peculiar
position the court said and the examna-
ton should be conducted carefully Wit
ness had counsel and had probably advised
with him 1t shoDlG not he inferred that
the court meant TO reflect upon the Gov
ernment attorney. Mir. Davis answered:
MAY l. without offense, call the atten-
tion OF the court to the suggestion that
the witness may have received additional
light over night?"
Il have told you, Mr.. Davis, that the
court did not intend a reflection upon you,
and the justice proceeded more particu-
larly to assure Mr.. Davis that the re-
mark was not personal
MI Davis again stated that he would not
pursue the examination He had placed
the witnesses on the stand, he said, without
previous cosutation with him. His pur-
pose today was to enter into more par
ticular examination and elicit facts which
he could not bring out unless he were per
mitted to proceed on the line lie had laid
down.
Mr.. Shillington proceeded to cross ex-
aminethe witness. He asked butfew ques-
items. but obtained a response during the
., xx.it
ness had not told the truth when questioned
| 10y the secret service agent. He had SAID
that Nc Elhone was innocent that he had
also told the secret service officers that
| certain papers had been taken from a
| ledge near the door of the room in the
| library where the Force collection was
| stored.
Then you have not told the truth at
all times since the investigation began
| was one question propounded.
with that considered, l suppose not"
returned the witness.
The district attorney had Attorney John
| H Turner called, evidently to that gentle
mans surprise.
The first quest asked was as to
whether he was connected with the de-
| fenSe of either of the accused as counsel
| He replied that he was associated with
| Mr.. Lipscomb for the defense Of Turner.
| He was next asked whether either he or
| Mr.. Lipscomb had at any time had any
| conversation with him, Mr., Davis, or with
| anyone in his office concerning the case
| He said he had with Mr Lipscomb en-
| deayored to have the district attorney per-
| nit Turner to plead guilty to a violationof
| the act of 1878, but that the proposition
had been rejected by Mr Davis, unless
| they would agree TO have plea of guilty
as to all OF the indictments.
WAS anything said by you, or by Mr..
| Lipscomb, so far as you know, to me, or to
| anyone in my office, about putting Turner
| on the stand as a witnesS?'
mo, sir, said Mr.. Turner
That's all - returned Mr.. Davis
Attorney A. A. Lipsconb was ncxtcalled.
| He a nd Mr.. Turner are counsel for defend
ant Turner. Mr.. Lipscomb cOTrOboTated his
colleagues testimony.
That's our case, your HONOR was the
district attorneys closing comment.
Attorney Douglas, of counsel for McEl-
hone. arose at this point and moved that
the court instruct the jury to return a YER
dict OF acQuittal, upon the grounds that the
charge is not sustained by the evidence
He reviewed the testimony and after nam
ing each of the articles mentioned in the
Indictment said there was insufficient
evidence to connect McElhone with the
theft OF the papers or with the sale of
them.
ThevcTy most tha tC an be s aid, Mr.. Douglas
observed, with Turner'S evidence consid-
cred, was that CElhone might be in
dicted for receiving stolen goods, know
ing them to be stolen, but with Turner'S s
testimony omitted, there was absolutely
nothing to convict McElhone Turner'S S
evidence was not corroi,orated, and was
contradictory. lie dwelt upon the fact
that Me cElhone had voluntarily told what
he knew OF the papers; had voluntarily re-
stored those in his possession, and had
disclosed the amounts he had received for
those sold.
Mr. Douglas also called atten ton to the
fact that Turner had voluntarily informed
thechief oftE seoretservice that Nc Elhone
wasinnocent. Turner'S testimony, whether
condemning or exculpating the defendant,
should not be considered, but as, a matter
of fact, the witness had exculpated Nc
Elhone as to six of the papers, and as
to the other three. the testimony was un-
worthy OF consideration as an element.
Justice Bradley called attention to the
fact that three of the arucles-the roll of
thearificers, the Cortland commission, and
the William Williams letter-were found i n
the defendants possession. The evidence
was that these were a part of a mass of
papers taken. 1t was matter for the jury
to consider whether or not the evidence
n q @xolnx. p