Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-05-04

assistant United States district attorney.
and Mr. Worth;ngton, leading counsel for
the deit nse as to the line of the latters
cross-t.X animation of Assistant Attorney
Webster of the Post Office Department, who
was on the witness stand. Mr.. Worthlngton
declared that Mr.. TaggGrt was endeavoring
tc place him in the attitude of controverting
statements made in the annual reports of
General Tyner. Mr.. Worthington objected
to this and stated with some warmth, that
he was endeavoring to differentiate only be-
tween certain cases. TT, records, he said
would show whether or not any statements
made by General Tyne. We're contradicted
and therefore he thought the matter should
be left 10 the jury.
Justice Pritchard instructed counsel to
proceed with the introduction of testimony:
the court would place the matter rightly
before the jury.
Once again during the redirect examina-
ton of the witness counsel for defense OBJ
jected to questions claimed TO be leading.
The court directed that conclusions should
not be presented to the witness for a cate
gorical answer to whether or not they
were So Questions should be asked direct,
the court ruled.
Mr. Webster concluded his testimony
shortly before noon. Nothing OF interest
was elected from him. He was brought
forward largely for the purpose of identi-
flying a great mass of papers and publica-
tions and to reveal the practice of the office
of the assistant attorney general for the
Post Office Department In dealing Win
fraud orders.
Chief Inspector Cochrane Of the Post Of
flee Department was the second witness,
being brought to the stand for the purpose
of testifyng as to his investigation of GER
tain alleged fraudulent concerns whose use
of the mails is involved III the charge OF
conspiracy against Gen. Tyner and Mr.
Barrett.
n. uo,-,aS Conrad snacinl counsel for
the United States in the post office trials
occupied today seat on the elevation near
the fury box. He occupied this same seat
during the Machen trial 1t Is line point
of vantage, overlooking the witness stand
jury box and attorneys tables
MI. Barrett Assists Counsel.
Mr.. Barrett who is practicing attorney
himself. is actively assisting his attor-
neys Cen Tyner is rarely consulted. 1t
is the desire of all connected with the trial
to bother him as little as possible.
The striking dissimilarity between the
present trial and that of Machen and the
Croft brothers is a matter of general COM
ment at the city hall. The Machen trial
bristled with color and excitement. Inc
charges and the testimony were or a SEN
sational character throughout
In the present case the testimony SO lar
introduced has been almost wholly techh'-
cal The charge is one of conspiracy, anu
40 the district attorney stated to the jury,
is not susceptible of direct proof ne work
OF the prosecution is to present certain laets
ar alleged facts, leaving the jury 10 oe-
termine whether or not there is ground LOT
the belief that a conspiracy existed Inc
evidence is extensively documentary, anu
is accordingly very dry. The prosecutor
axnacts 10 nroye that certain concerns were
favored by General Tyner in violation OF
tho revised statutes. 1t expects TO prove
that Mr. Barrett nephew of General lyh-
er's wife, represented many of the alleged
fraudulent firms as attorney before General
Tyncr. and that between these two there
was a conspiracy 10 defraud the govern
mcnt The defense stoutly maintains
that there was no such conspiracy: that
! General Tyner acted in accordance with
| law and discretion and that Mr.. Barrett
nosition was entirely legitimate.
| The determination of these conflicting
! contentious is expected to require three
weeks or more of the courts time.