Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-05-16
EVIDENCE FOR DEFENSE.
The Reading of Letters and Papers
Occupies Time of Court.

For half an hour after the proceedings
were resumed this morning the defense
read to the jury extracts from letters and
reports to make complete evidence that had
been submitted by the prosecution. First,
the jurors were enlightened in reference TO
correspondence about the case of E. j. Ar
mold & Co., and then they listened to por-
lions of the reports made by Gen. Tyner
as assistant attorney general for the Post
Office Department. The defense laid stress
on the statements made by Gen. Tyner in
his reports about his practice in regard to
fraud orders.
The first witness to be called today by the
defense was Gen. L. T. Kitchener, formerly
attorney general of Indiana and now
member Of the firm of Dudley & Kitchener.
attorneys, of this city. The witness testi-
fed that upon the occasion of a visit to the
Post Office Department in 1897, he was IN
formed by Gen. Tyner that no line of de-
narration between business that was law
full and business that was unlawful, con-
Quoted by bond investment concerns. had
been laid down. Therefore. 1t was arrang-
ed that test case should be instituted for
the purpose of securing decision by the
court. The object of the defense was to
show that the preparation of the Barrett
opinion of December 5, 1900, was the climax
of natural steps, and was not in further
ance of conspiracy to secure legal BUSH
ness for Barrett when he should have re-
signed from the department and engaged in
practice.
Major Conrad objected to the line of ex-
animation, contending that the conduct of
General Tyner was not the subject of in
quiry. and that conversations the witness
had In 1897 with General Tyner as to the
latter's general policy were not admissible.
The objection was overruled.
General Kitchener told of criminal case
instituted against one of his clients, by
which they hoped to secure ruling on the
legality of the business carried on by bond
investment concerns.
I'VE demurred to the Indictment" the
witness explained, land hoped to obtain a
written opinion, but the judge died, l un-
derstand, before the opinion was pre-
pared"
Here is his written opinion" Major Con-
rad remarked, holding up typewriter
paper.
Il never saw it or heard of it, the wit
ness replied. 1t developed that the paper
was not the opinion General Kitchener had
in mind.
Continuing, the witness testified that Gen.
Tyner and Mr.. Barrett did all that was pos
sibIe to secure a legal opinion on the sub
iect in question. Finally 1t was announced
that the department would wait no longer.
but would make study of the issues and
reach its own conclusion. The witness had
alw avs received prompt treatment at the
hands of Gen. Tyner and Mr.. Barrett
The defense next proceeded to show by
the witness that the firm OF Dudley &
Michener was employed by E. j. Arnold &
Co.. the turf investment concern of ST.
Louis. Mo-. at the same time Mr.. Barrett
was employed by that company: that the
employment was on the same subject and
that the transaction was entirely straight
and honest
Testimony as to Reputation.
In connection with his testimony in ref
erence to Arnold & Co. the witness men,
tened the name of Mr.. Fauntleroy.
What is his reputation Attorney
worthington inquired.
He stands high" the witness replied.
Ills reputation is excellent" Maj. Conrad
admitted.
"He spoke well of you, MAJOR" Gen.
Kitchener added. "and for that reason /
assumed that he stood high"
The witness said he had known Gen. Ty-
ner since he twitness) was little boy. and
that his reputation as a man of honor and
integrity is excellent. The witness had
known Mr.. Barrett for fourteen years, and
could say the same regarding the latter's
reputation.
A little more life was interjected into the
proceedings when a difference of opinion as
to the nature of statement made by the
witness occurred between Attorney WORTH
ington and Major Conrad. The stenogra-
piers notes showed that the recollection