The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1900-01-12

said he knew Seigler; had worked for
him; said he a not been able TO get
a JOB since arrest
Bernard asked Helms il he did not
nave a suit for SO. 900 damages for false
arrest against Detective Perry, and IL
he did not say this because he Lao such
suit against Perry in this court Helms
said he said it because it was The truth.
After he left the bar of which he was
IN charge, ft was closed because the
owners could get nobody TO take charge
of it. Helms was very sharp in his
to Berrard's questions, and
kept court in laughter at Ber-
nard's "opens He was asked il he did
not know there was 2 warrant out for
Tippet ard said No. Was asked IL
he did not get Tippet u of Whining
ton and replied yes-drove him to
Castle Hayne, where he took the train;
that papers said Tippett was charged
with stealing a horse, but he did not
steal it Some questions were sought
70 Do asked rsgading Hslms' damage
suit against Perry, but the judge ruled
these out as irrelevant.
MR.. MARSHALL'S TESTIMONY.
A. j. Marshall, was at 1890 put on
the witness stand. He was as at all
times during the trial very DOL n
collected. His wife SCI twenty feet
away, facing him. Bellamy exemined
him. He said he was SO years old; had
been a Ia wyer Ten yoars, also a real
estate agent. 1t was not true that he
ever engaged in counterfefting had
no knowledge of it, CT any connection
with any ~counterfeiters that he was
aware of. The letters written to the
Pennsylvania Smelling Co., Of Phila-
delpha were shown witness. Said he
wrote h letters and that the bills on
file Were sent him. Marshall aid:
Their are only three letters. There
is a fourth one not here"
Bernard objected to Bellamy's request
to Marshall to tell all he knew about
the matter. Objection over ruled
Marshall aid there were three let
teIs in the file, one of which he wrote,
end two he dictated. He said: There
is still another letter" At these words
Bernard cried out, Objection Bel
lamy said The fou nda'tion had been ex-
Iressly laid for this question.
RoUrtree said there would be no at
tempt to prove the contents of any
missing letter, but TO SHOW there was a
letter not in papers put on file by the
prosecutions; that the lltterc filed show
ed there was missing letters. He ad-
mitted that the contents of this could
rot be proved save as secondary evil
dence, but it would be proved there was
a missing letter, and would be proved
to this court and to the wCr'1 at large
49, IN oIN
hat they were letters WHEN at the
instance CT his client. He said the
judge had been very fair hearing this
case.
FOUTH LETTER RULED OUT
Judge Purrell said witness Ludens-
lag 1, OF Philadelphia ite-tified that he
had only three lette1S Id kn2w of no
other letters. and ruled hat to ad nit
suoh evidence would be in violation Of
of all rules Of evidence; ho therefore
ruled cot every ming as 10 the fourth
! letter.
BerraId said the LETTERS speak for
themselve., in black and White.
In the file there was a letter written
tC tine Penn Company, filed as first let
ter, 10 which enveiop- WIS attached.
Bernard filed this, but later wanted
to withdraw letter ard envelope, say
ing it YVES no, written by Marshal.
: There were no ~enve'OpCs fled with
| Ma1shalrs ~letters.
Rountree aid tbs Letter nd envelope
had been filed and NUT remain.
NJ lrshall said when this first letter
was written h did not know Politz.
| Bernard insisted tn t MaI5nal could
not r fer to this first 1efflr. Bellamy
read The letter fil-i as Nc. l which was
from PClitz order g silver, an0 dated
Ma ,ch 23rd, 1898. A 1ertec and bill
from the Pen Company, TO Politz,
dated March 26th, which was on file
was also reed. Marshall swore it was
written long before his acquaintance
with Politz. Marshail gave the reason
he wrote tbs lett-r fCi C~CtsobeloS. He
had a m morardUm madl 4 the time.
Bernard sought to prevent him read
ing from m morandLm ard the Judge
caid he could not rea6 memorandum,
but could us it tC r6fr sh his memory
as tC dat : and ether facts. The dis
trict attoI ley ard Judge looked at the
memo andum Bernard sd the gov
err merit would want this memorandum
for use during the tlial.
. R0untree s2id the govern nant would
not let MarshalPs counse see a tele-
gram which detective Perry had.
lHOW AND WHY METAL WAS Or
DERED.
Marshall continued lis evidence, say
ing he Offended PoGitz in tn fall of
1898 wher arrested fer violating the
liquor law. WSlter Yopp, soon after
the Politz fire, brought a loSter to Mar
shall to cCTscI his fire insul ance; this
was the fl st time he ever met POlitz.
Bernard objected to question ais to
whethG: there was double in collecting
the Insurance. (Politz had said there
was none) Judge said no lawyer could
give a privilege communication be-
tween himsef and client, and that this
court could not ALLOW such evidence.
He Iuled the question out, also the
question whether insurance company
resisted the payment OF loss. Marshall
said Politz owed him money for fees
and paid half in cash and he uraded out
the other half; went to his store in Oc-
tober to give an order for groceries;
seated in room was an old Greek. He
got up, End clerk Howell introduced
him as the man who got PolitZ out of
bis trouble; the man turned out to be
H r. 0r~ -1LA,r< q O~ 100.
had dark hair and muStache, crooked
nose and face showed signs of small
pox; spoke very poor English. Cotso-
belos stopped Marshall, and asked his
office address; Marshall wrote it on
a scrap of brown paper, and invited him
TO come to see him as Cotsobelos said
he had some work he wished done.
Marshall stated he did not write the
letters on his own account. but wrote
them foI C~otsobelOs; did not then. or
ct any other time when he wrote the
,etters do so with knowledge that sub
stances were to be used for counter