The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-01-19
WORKS AGAINST HIMSELF.
SAME COUNSEL REPRESENTING
BOTH SIDES OF A CASE.
Unique Circumstance I'm the Suit of
the Government Against Ex-Coi-
Iector saunders and Bondsmcn-
Attorney nuddress' Novel Position.

The unique spectacle OF men with con-
ficting interests being represented by tho
same counsel was witnessed In the Fed
eral court yesterday afternoon in the trial
Of the suit OF the government against ex-
Collector OF Customs j. G. Saunders and
his bondsmen. The ex-coleotor and VIII
liam Eldridgc, one of his bondsmen, were
tho conflicting parties, and A. w. Bud
dress. Port Townsend attorney, APP
peared in court TO defend them against
the claim OF the government.
One of the principal points In the case Is
the contention of Mr.. Eidridge that his
signature to the bond is a forgery. He
admits that he cannot read or write, and
claims his name was signed to the bond
without his authorization. The first part
Of the governments evidence was to In
troduce Saunders bond in evidence, and
before this could be done its authenticity
had to be proven. In order 10 do this.
United States Attorney Gay called Saun-
ders, the principal defendant, to the stand
as the first witness for the government
Saunders identified his own signature TO
the bond, and then was questioned about
the circumstances of Eldridge'S having
signed 1t.
He stated in reply that Eldridge was
brought into his office by Fred M. Terry,
special deputy collector OF CUSTOMS Terry
having agreed beforehand to ask Eldridge
to sign the bond. This was in July, 1896.
Eidridge, Saunders stated, told Terry to
did, the signature being witnessed by ].
w. Potter. am employe in Saunders bank,
and Terry himself.
After Mr.. Gay had concluded his direct
examination, Mr.. Buddress began the
novel task of cross-examinng his own
client.
"Mr Saunders" was his first question.
Sin what capacity are you here? Do you
come to confess Judgment against your
self and to act as the principal witness
defend this action against yourself?'
II am the main witness for the govern
ment," was the reply, "but purpose to
defend this suit. / claim am entitled to
the amount in issue here, but my chief
reason for coming is to prove that Ed
ridges signature TO the bond Is genuine,
and not a forgery"
In answer to further questions, Saun-
ders stated that for the past three weeks
he had been q resident of Portland, where
he was manager for a printing establish
ment. In answer to further queries he
stated that he has had many CONVERSE
lions with Eldridge since the latter is al
legged to have signed the bond, and that
on no occasion had Eldridge claimed he
did not sign the bond. He testified that
self and his bondsmen. Eldridge brought
his copy of the complaint to him (Saun-
ders) and asked him to employ counsei to
defend the suit. At that time Eldridge
made no claim, he says. that he was not
on the bond. In compliance with Ell
had employed Brinker, Jones & Richards
to represent him and the bondsmen, but
that firm had subsequently withdrawn be-
cause he could not pay them.
amned at yesterdays session. He will
be followed today by others whom 1t is
claimed will testify that Eldridge has ac-
tually admitted signing the bond.