New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-12-07

in INV happiness Always most cordia4 pyof 1WND
Tho address on the envelope containing the ie''er
Mrs. william schefier,
NJ - We" New-York city.
It was learned that Molineux was III ''e |
~ taking tea with the scheffiers every Sunu"'
afternoon .oa On the
Another letter read in court and passeu " '"'
jury. read: ,,,, n,ease
seDd me The remedy. and oblige, yours .ruu,ifi'x
No 6 Jersey-st., Newark. n. }.
These letters were all previously identineo ny u
witness "a having been written by the ue'e"ua
They were put In evidence. An lhuol 1t,
$780,, uas next shown. and identified by the wiz
ness as being indorstd In the hano"r'''"s -
neux. r
DISPUTE OVER ANOTHER LEI EN-
s,,r,,,trg another letter for identification ny
uenes Mr. Osborne asked counsel TOT 'ne "a
., ,roduca the Enclosure mentioned In H. az TIC 10
agreed IN do Mr. Weeks said he had agreeu o''' "
,roduca what he believed to be copy Vi ..,.onne
49, ,Ia aIso objected to 1t being put IN e'iuen IN
Icing non-relevant Mr.. Osborne insisted a. i :,
that the letter should go In eNue"'e' - cha
contained certain things that wouiu 30 '" -, th,t
state NJ mind OF the writer. MI. "eeh' ,.ooraer
,he writing was not diary o"' inc tarac,er
oorad 70 think that II was OF that cha'
apPea ,,,r,hor objected that there was nov" ,
Mr. bod
.'' 80. 49,, Io,,er 70 indicate that 1t ever rea'i
49,. a.,iratton or that 1t ever passeo o"' "
,rds or the writer by his own Voh'.o' .,..o,v
az. :, ro,o,es TO matters OF when tes.''no '
hoe baen given" said the Recorue''
rule the objection. 40 fouows
,rbereunon the letter was reau M ..,o,her 7
Ny Dear schefer: 90 nO' hat IL the cause OF
nv heine connected no longer WIZ" Wv
booker Athletic I hat Cornish should be allowed 10
70 ' oIcb a letter concerning an oh''
New-York athletic e,idsny considered this o. M
FOR cornish is in and | am OUT 20 some OF your
id like to have You es sn0 their opinion t. and
friends t az interest 10 you when the WHIST '''
meets. Yours very cOrdiaiKyo ROLAND MoLINEUx.
Oh. ,o,,ors and envelopes purportng 10 oe :.
49,, hardwr,ting Of the defendant were iae"t,",u
omorg them being some addrssseTH arry Friend
haitian Athletic Cup; Boar fr1 Cornish" The Court
CGfSt The necessity for much time Gel hat he
up with the letters Nj II, weeks in his crosse1
%ag Of Hees had opened up eera he witness
Information which he did nos me interests OF his
case by taking advantage OF Inc
edge. ,,,cvD
n,Ny MORE LETTERS PRODUCED
~. oshorne continued producing further eo"'.
r,,,r,cations and envelopes the hahu",Ne "A
which ueiles swore was that OF the a,,.r
they were placed In evidence some wv" nro,ea
o corresnondence note paper OF lates. anpppearinS
on and shape some were on cheap apP from a
amer that looked as II II had oe. .nneWrtten and
wrttine tablet and still others were psrations OF
NIL he signature and lnterlinear a'er"'o'
the defendant ,,,,s, N the fact
A letter to John D. Adams pointing 70 VIZ
that Molineux resigned from the ~ cor
Athletic Club because or MS III iee'"e
nish was read as follows
Ny Dear Ad bsTe resigned from the A. c. c. 90
not for moment supPose IN, ma highest personal
Te@ard for its officers but have peen "a uery best
element in its councils eeeiu Which am confident
IL wrong pocy-hat of allowing an ep 20 get
use the club for persona, So Sispease him This
ann not in sympathy with Belieye me- hope you
nR resign s6I, T s6 Mr sS in
NAV wi see how stand in THIS matter Wishing SDu
9aIy Of ' RR6L hrSRBy s5iSSs S
Another letter showing the feeling of the defend
ont toward cornish was admitted. 1t was written
TO Peter T. Austen. and read:
Nv Dear Austen: Incosed Is the letter written 6y
Cornish which Mr.. Weeks reierred 70 ns S.S
man OF the Athletic Committee OF the Ne"-i0''
cot the original letter and showed 1t to Mr.
letter although written on K. A, C. CIuo paper a"o
typewriter. ,..,, hoya made Cornish
anologize for | do not think an ernpioye OF ,n'
X A. c. should be allowed to speak so Oh sen're
man who is an official OF another c'"0' anu ~
send this to you so you will know the reason
TOT d Any noi want nv friends to believe the many
unkind things that are being said about me by The
Please return the letter by bearer. Always yours
truly. hoHA4>D'
The work OF submitting these letters to Heiie'
FOR Identification and then having them admi''e.
as evidence took up a considerable part OF the al
,ernoon. Recorder Golf was plainly wearied witt
M LET
asked Mr.. Osborne how lsng II would take MIN tt
finish. The task came to an END gtlmateLy' nov "
Mclaughlin was recalled.
f. c. M'LAUGHIIN RECALLED.
81 have no questions to ask" Mr.. Osborne said
"I merely wanted 10 give Mr.. Weeks muci
sought opportunity TO cross-examine you Answer
ing counsel for the defence Mr.. IAughnn testi
fed that he was president and treasurer or tn
Frederick stearns Company Of Detroit, Mich Thu
witness said he did not write the letter press cop!
identified as the reply to the one received by then
signed Charles Jacobs Co. because he was no
and had no personal knowledge of it's being copied
He did not remember having signed any letter u
did so Mr. Mclaughlin later testified that the let
tiers were written and copied in the ordinary cours
Mr.. Osborne desired the Court to admit the lette
press copy evidence, but Mr.; Weeks loudly OBJ
sequenty, Mr. McLaughlin's long Journey from
Detroit 10 aid the prosecution was frultess, va
lev hf the es hanGwTiing Expert e described himse
! as professional penman, and said he had for
number OF years studied handwriting. He said h
kne the defendant. knew his handwriting and ha'
seen him write. Mr.. Osborne thereupOn was pro
ceeding 10 get the witness TO Identify specimens o
Molineux's writing when Mr.. Weeks objected
Counsel contended that Mr.. Osborne was using al
| expert as a lay witness A long and technical dis
| cussion ensued as TO the admissibliy OF Mr. Kins
lev as a Law witness The defence took the stan'
that the witness had secured such knowledge OF tn
defendants handwriting would enable him &
intelligently testify from a study OF his Handwriting
rhu ~, he prosecution "a
/ pert and because Of this was not admissible "A
| Law witness Citations were read and discussion
/ were INDUCED In and the defence's objection wa
| finally oyerruled.
OBJECTIONS AROUSE THE RECORDER.
Mr. Knsiey then. in answer 10 questions. said n
had seen the defendant write on TWO occasions
once on February H. 1899 In the District Attorney
| office and again ON FehrnarY % 1879 In the of1c