The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-10-16
JOHNS GOT 7 IDLE OF IT Tcvs of Money Paid by Ryan. MILLER DID NOT PROFIT Defendant SWearS There Was
 no Conspiracy. Denies That He Told ths Turf In- vestment Company Man "Here Are the Goods."-Reiations
 With Miller.
 
MILLER DID NOT PROFIT

Cincinnati, Oct 15.-The trial of Joseph M. Johns and Daniel V. Miller for com spiracy to extract a bribe from John !. Ryan, while Miller was Assistant Attor- ney-General for the Postoface Depart ment, was me erked today by the recalling of John J. Ryan and Inspector Fulton as witnesses for the defense. which open ed its case.
 They had previously appeared for the Government. Joseph M. Johns. one of ths defendants, also testified. Johns ad- mitted on the stand that he had received a telegram and a letter from Miller giving the ruling of the department in the case of Ryan's Turf Investment Company, and that when he communicated 1t to Ryan. tho latter paid over $l.5oo. no part of which went to Miller.
 Christiancy Testifes.
 c. A. c. Christiancy, who was the first Assistant Attorney in the ofiice of the Assistant Attorney General fer the Post ofiice Department when D. V. Miller was second Assistant Attorney-G General in the same office, testified to ell the presents ,tions and considerations of the case of John J. Ryan & Co.,, the turf commission CTS, who had been using the mails In ''bookmaking." He did not know if ke had seer all the correspondence between Miller and Johns. the latters attorneys. Miller did not show him the reports of the inspectors that recommended that a fraud order should be issued against the use of the malls by Ryan's concern.
 Rulison. the witness, said Ryan's att torney came with the highest recom- mendations and that Miller and Hoovener assisted him 0Christiancy) in directing ths case of Ryan 6 Co. He did not know that Miller had ever recommended fraud nrI. Nx. kAa ETD lad out of the room at one hearing for a short time and at another Miller was in charge. After Ryan appeared with his attorneys, before the witness. Miller and Hoovener, there was no agreement at that time to dismiss the eAHe and allow Ryan & Co. to continue their business
 Chffsiiancy's recoIfectfofi was that the decision was contingent upon g stfbse- duent report of the inspectors. Witness was shown the record Book of his office indicating that the case had been dismiss ed and he could not tell who made that record. Miller's reports to him were in acc ,rdanee with those of the inspectors.
 Christiancy identified the letter that witness wrote, giving the stipulations un- der which Ryan & Co.,, were allowed to continue their business through the mails. After being on the stand an hour and forty minutes, Christiancy was excused.
 Johns's Letter to Ryan.
 The Government then submitted letters dated last February from Johns to Ryan at which time the latter was a grand jury witness and the former wanted him to meet him half way" By these let- ters the Government wanted to prove af- ter the alleged conspiracy an effort to compromise 10 as to avoid prosecution.
 William J. Vickery of Evansville, Ind, and Robert M. Fulton, postoffice inspec- tors, testified fully as to their work in investigating the cases of Miller and Johns, reciting all their meetings with the defendants, J. J. Ryan and others, and identifying the reports that they had made to Chief Ochran at Washington Paul Victor Kaiser, clerk in the Post office Department at Washington. testt- fled to keeping the record of certain legal cases and to making the entry indicting the dismissal of the Ryan case, but he said he made such entries just as directed by D. V. Miller. who furnished memo randum for the same.
 At the afzternoon session Joseph M Johns, one of the defendants testified.' He first met D. V. Miller in 1880 when he introduced him as a speaker at a political meeting. Afterward he had been employed with Miller in cases and they were closely associated.
 Practice Desirable.
 Last September Miller came from Wash ington to try a case at Rockville. Mil Ter then told the witness that practice before the Postofice Department was de- sirable
 Johns said there was no arrangement between them and nothing like con- spiracy, but that his duties as deputy prosecutor did not require all his time and that he wanted other business. His letters to Ryan finally brought the con- ference at the Filbeck Hotel in Terre Haute. The witness then repeated what transuared between them. He told Ryan he was a young attorney seeking busi- ness; that he had sen Ryan's literature. considered it faulty and believed he could help him. Ryan told him he had been cited before the department at Washing ton and he had no intention to quit the business.
 Johns told him he thought Ryan's con- cern could be so re-organized as to con tinue John said they had little talk until he made a contract with Ryan for @. 800 for legal services contingent upon getting favorable action from the Post office Department and another contract for 5000 for revising his circulars and other matter so that 1t would be allowed to pass through the mails.
 The Cincinnati Meeting.
 Johns testified that he did nothing the day he got the telegram from Miller rela- tive to the ruling. but that the next morning he received two letters, one for himself and the other for Ryan, when he communicated with his client. The examination continued to the meeting later in Cincinnati at the Gibson House.
 Witness denied he then told Ryan: Here are the goods'' or that '1t took mighty clever work to get Christiancy's name to the document"
 The witness handed Ryan the letter about the decision the next morning and the latter paid him $1. 900 in cash and gave him two checks for $1. 900 and $1 400 respectively. These payments with the 500 advanced previously at Terre Haute made s4,50O. Counsel for the defense then produced bank books of the witness show ing that he deposited this money in banks in Rockville and also his subsequent cheeks in dispoSinR of if for building A