Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-04-04
GREENE-GAYN0R TRIAL
FURTHER TESTIMONY FOB THE
DEFENSE RESUMED TO-DAY.
Special Disp.tch to The star.

Special Dispatch to The Star.
SAVANNAH, Ga. April 4.-On the re-
sumption OF the Greene and Gaynor trial
this morning a renewed effort was made by
the defense to secure the admission of the
testimony Of w. H Fiagg OF New York.
F1agg was q stock broker who testified be-
fore Commissioner Shields in New York to
financial and stock transactions bearing
upon the case. The afidavit of New York
physician was offered to prove Flags's In
ability to attend the trial, but 1t was not
accepted by the court.
Capt. B. D. Greene. one OF the defend
ants, then took the stand He said he was
a graduate of the Military Academy in the
class of 1898 and gave a brief history on
his service before leaving the army. In
1882 he resigned with the purpose Of build
ing a railroad near Charleston. but this
plan did not materialize and he came to
Savannah for contract work. In 1855 FORM
ing a partnership with John F. Gaynof.
He did not know Carter when that ofncer
came to Savannah.
The witness said he could not recall the
details Of loan of 81 600 he had made to
Carter In 1886, which was repaid. This,
he said. was the only loan he had ever
made to Carter. He described business en-
terprises In which he had been engaged
among them.
The Chile Project.
The Chile project upon which Greene ana
Gaynor expected to embark and upon which
the governments counsel had dwelt, as OF
Importance as showing the relationship
that existed between Carter and the de-
PENDANTS. was told OF by the witness, VINO
said that Carter had no part or interest IN
the enterprise. Greene's letter to Carter,
he said had been written only In the utmost
friendliness. and the illusions to we IN
the letter were to Greene and Gaynor and
their then prospective profitable CONTRACT
in Chile. There was no understanding that
Carter was to be in the enterprise, nor did
he bear any part Of the $1,000 expense that
was incurred to no purpose.
Mr.. Osborne, for the defense, brought out
from the witness many enterprises OF mag
nttude upon which he was embarked IN ad-
dition to the river and harbor work at Sa-
yannah. Among these was the mining en-
terprise near Santiago, at the docks or
which the United States force landed in the
Cuban expedition In the war with Spain.
The company in which he and Gaynor were
interested spent 81. $50 900. the witness said.
The sewer work at Orange. N. j., was de-
scribed. upon which the witness said the
Empire Construction Company with which
he was identified, lost thousands of dollars
Interrupted by the Court.
The court interrupted to ask IL 1t WAS
necessary to enter so deliberately and mi
nutely into all the details OF the various
engineering contracts in which the defend
ants had been engaged. Mr.. Osborne an
swered that it was very essential, as the
expert accountant for the government had
undertaken to show the issuance of checks
In payment for work done on Savannah
contracts and to exhibit checks or depoS
its of Greene or Gayner of similar amounts
upon corresponding or approximate dates.
The line of examination. therefore. Mr. Os-
borne said, was to show that Greene and
Gaynor were engaged upon such large I'M
dertakings that 1t was matter of such
draw from their banks large sums that
1t was an error to attach the significance
to these transactions that the government
thought they bore.
An Exhaustive Explanation.
An exhaustive explanation of the con-
struction of mattresses and their use in
jetties was given by the defendant The
represented economy and saving for the
government. When Mr.. Osborne asked
Capt. Greene a further question about null
tiple mattresses, the district attorney OBJ
jected on the ground that the question was
leading, and said that IL multiple mat
tresses were cheaper they should have been
called for In the specifications, also that
other contractors than Greene & Gaynor
might have had an opportunity to bid on
them
During the carrying out OF the 1895 con-
tract, near Fernandina, Fla, the defendant
said he and Gaynor were absent and the
work was left to the SUPPLEMENTARY Of the
younger Gaynors.