Indiana State Sentinel, Volume 24, Number 25, Indianapolis, Marion County, 2 February 1875 — Page 1

no IMIANAPOLIS, TUESDAY FEBRUARY 2, 1375. TOL. XXIV KO. 25. WHOLE OTBQ3ER

.1

THE OLD STORY. '

THE SCANDAL SUIT. ttoodruft's tbstijiont admitted tilton OALLEBTO TIK STAN D AKGUM ENT OVER HIS RIGHT TO TESTIFY. New York, Jan. 27. There was ti usual crowd at tLe Tilton-Boecher trial to-day. The counsel and principals were on hand early. Judge Neilson, upon opening of court, -gave his decision upon the poiDt raided yesterday by Evsrts, as to Kr. WocÄrufTs giving a relation of what occurredt the lnterview"ttween3en. Tracy, Moulton and himself, when Bieber was not preset Judge Neilson said tbat he had-examined tbeuutborlMes on tbeaabject, and raled that the wrtnesa might relate all that-eccurred at the interview. The attention of the coKrt 'was celled to a pampbJet tesued fron: th Trtbano office, entitled part one of tho oCSoial report of the Tilton-Deecher trial. Judge Follerton stated tha: instead of bavlr evidence onlvon the trial there wwa comments relating to Moulton and the counsel. Ir. Beach paid an elegant tribute to MouUonava witness and Kvirts In turn said tkat they were not actors on the tag9, JudceNeilaon gaid that be would confer with the publishers about this matter. Franklin R. Woodruff then deposed: Mouito a proceeded 'to tell Tpacy about the casa tbnt-the points published by Mrs. T7oodhc.il n-owk imp Unuifrin mulA ha had been trvirif to keep the case covered up. Tracy said that. ne ia not reeoinmena ijiug,. um 1 thi case be thought it was per'ctly justifiable. IIo also recommended that either Meulton or Tilton be sent to Europe. Crot-s-examined: I introduced Moulton to yoa on that occasion. I think you asked Moulton if the scandal rested on anything else but the " letter of contrition and other papers, and be said there also remained the statement made by Mrs. Tilton to her htssDand. I don't recollect being present on any other occasion in the tody than : et tbU interview. I have heard the "True etory" read. This interview, I think, began aboet 4 or .5 in the alternoon and ended at night, I think. - We had supper, which iaeted about an hour, and the balance t the time was" spent discussing the Woodholl scacdal. The pistol scene rune up for discussion, and Moulton said it was incorrectly reported there. I think you said to Moulton that the Krt cf the ttory which related -to him could refuted, and I think you read the story paragraph by .paragraph. I do not remeruD9r that Moulton at tbat interview denied telling the story to Mrs. Woodhs.ll, nor did lie admit having told it. The counsel read portions of the Woodhull article, and asked tbi witness 11 Moaiton denied teliing them to Urs. Wood hull at that interview. The witness replied that he had SO REMEMBRANCE of the parts of the scandal read, as he took no uteres? when they were discussed at that interview. I don't think you advised Moulton to deny the Woodhull card in so far a it related to bim. I was in the habit of gokag to Moulton's in 1871. I met Tlfton there. He was out of employment and wished to start a paper and said 15,000 or (20,000 would . be enough to start with. lie announced tbat he was gofeg to start it, and I advaoced then 13,000. There was about 512,000 subscribed. I p&id la $1,600 and got his note for the amount. I saw Mr.Soutbwick and told him About lt. I bave never paid the 13,000 but was released from it. This concluded the testimony of Woodruff, and Ex-Judge Fullerton called Theodore Tilton, who took the chair. Evart objected to TJlton's being sworn, and made a long argument. Tie counsel maintained chiefly that all the authorities wer Against the right of a husband or wife to ttatify for or against each other, as their rights and privileges were qua and the innovation destroyed and de tiled the privacy and sanctity of the marriage relation. Mr. Evartsread from several eminent jortets in support of his position, lie claimed generally that if such a rule were adopted, perjury and the violation of tb nearest and dearest relations of confidence would follow. The law, said Mr. Evarts, throws around the great civil system of domestic Inviolability the pure robed figure of silence and secresy. It does nothing by halves. It is complete, thorough aDd perlect and fctates the fact so that all can uude rtand. Gen. Pryor argued on behalt of the defense and said that ho would adhere striotly to the point in dispute. The question was this: Was a plaintiff in an actlr-n a competent witness in his own behalf. Thje common law excluded all parties In suits in which they were interested. We bad now attained to that humane and enlightened degree thai a criminal indicted was allowed to testify in bis own behalf. In 1857 the barrier was removed by the legislature of New York from a party interested in a cause testifying on his own behalf, and by a subsequent alteration Of a phraseology he was compellable to testify. This was the law which governed this case and would allow him to tell the story of bis own sad wrong. It might be argued by the other side tbat Mrs. Tilton was a party to the action. She, the counsel admitted, had an Interest of feelmg" nd repute, bot it was not sufficient to constitute her a party to the cause, as the at ol 18C7 excluded tue wife as a party to the act. Mr. Tilton was not in a situation to be acted on by it, but Mrs. Tilton was, and this is what the law meant. The counsel was quoting legal authorities in Bupportof his position wbei the hour of adjournment arrived, and he will continue bis argument to-morrow. THE SUIT OF TILTON. THE TRIBCNB POBLICATION LONQ ARGUMENT OVKR TILTON'a ADMISSIBILITY ARGUMENT ft? PRIOR, F.VARTS AND BEECH THE COURT RIKJtVK9 IIIS DECISION. New York, Jan. 0. There was a great crowd cl lawyers this morning In the Brooklyn City Court room to hear the arguments on the question of the admission of Theodore Tilton as a witnesj in tho case. Judge Nielson stated that he' was Informed by the editor of the Tribune that the pamphlet containing the so-called official report of the first part of the trial was not issued from the Tribune office. The judge then censured the publishers for the severe criticisms ol Mr. Moulton and hoped tho offence would not be repeated. Atter the Jury had answered to their names. Gen. Pryor resumed his argument in favor of receiving the testimony of Theodore Tiiton. He said tbat the act or 18C7 contemplated no such thing as prohibiting the parties to the oi, in the case of adultery, from riving evidence for or against each other. This witness did not attempt to take the tand against bin wife, but against her alleged seducer, to testify to a crime committed by tteecber. Iu the eas of Pofer agfticst Howe the supreme court decided in 1874 a case or criminal conduct, and the husband was allowed to Wllfy. An appral was taken, to the general term. Tlmw wh elaborately argued, and attentively listened to ty the court, ird there was no question with tbe court that tbe wltnes was admia-a-Dle. and cr,cdd Li cernr Mencv. Th question w.th iht court now. -as to what decision u nimull follow, 'flu learned güiititujan ou the otLer aido argutd

as another reason, that no husband or wile could give collateral evidence iu a suit, tbat was, could not give evidence the one to criminate the other. But that was not sonnd law. It was not tbe law of Eugland, neither, was It tbe law of America. The counsel quoted two cases, where the husband in one cane was convicted of perjury on tbe testluioay of his wile, and in the other he was convicted of perjary and bigamy. In a car-e in this state. Justice Barrets say: "Tho . evidence of the hunband and wile is receivable, though the evident may criminaw one or the other." Certainly thit was tb ease fci this state. He bad selected one case from the state of New Jereey where tbe limitation of the law waa propounded by the court, which aid tbat the only question was iu admitting the evidence of tbe husband where he said he thought the rule BhouVd be extended and limited. It plain.tiff were admitted to the stand and proved adultery against his wile, did tbat charge her with any crime or criminality. No, for that was not the law aa it was known in New York. ADULTÜRT WAS KOT A CRIME or an offenso in New York. Ilecce the reasons of the counsel on the other skie were inapplicable, because they would not affect the crincinality of the wife nor the inadmissibility of the plaintiff aa a competent witness. He was a competent witness, the counsel argaed In conclusion, and should be so sworn. William A. 'Beach rose to sustain tbe argument of his brother counsel. He paid a compliment to the rhetoric of the counsel on tbe.other side. Tbat declamation, he said, would have looked better had it came from one who wes not defending a manvho was believed to be walking in tbe illustrious fooUteps of bis master.' Whatever Beecher might say on that etand the justice or Impartiality of the law debarred Tneodore Tilton from answering the imputations. The seducer would be allowed on tbe stand, while tbe man whom be had wronged would be forced to sit idly by with bis dps sealed. Thie was a grave and important subject which bis honor ld to deal with. T4:e counsel fcsiieved that tbe law cherished tenderly the family and hotne. He crgued that no society or government could stand except upon toe sanctity of tbe domestic circle being preserved inviolate. The saoe held good with regard to the marriage relations. The counsel on the other Bids hald tbat this union f souls could not be torn, but the speaker

submitted that it had tjeen mangled and torn. His friends on tie other side were digging among the fossils of the past and bringing up dead carcasses of exploded themes end parading them by the way of argumeat. But these were not to guide the court. Tbe counsel imagined a cultured and happy home, the wife, a weak, frail woman devoted to tbe husband of Ler early choice and tbe father of children. She bad a pastor, learned and honored, gifted among bis fellows, one whose words were listened to with deference and reverence. Ah ! he was gifted with a silver tOngue that would bring an angel out of paradise. She looked up to him with reverence. He was almost an inmate of her home and was in the confidence of her husband. He exerted upon her all bis arts and she fell. Is she to be blamed for the act? Was this peisecution brought against her for her condemnation? Ob, no I Consider how 'strong he was and how weak she was, and imagine the specious ways in which he taught her tbat fornication wa.3 but a species of love. That seducer is brought into the hall of justice to asswer for his crime. There was no rule in tbe law of this state to prevent the injured man from testifying against him in a suit. In behalf ol this proposition tbe counsel cited from CM E ROCS ACTtlDEITIKa. 'He called attention t j the case of Southwick against Southwick, in 49th New York, as a case In question. It Is said that this is tbe destruction of conjugal felicity, but the law should be uniform and universal in Its character, ana there should be no diversities of opinions. But was not the harmony in tbe conjugal relation to be disturbed as much by allowing the husband and wife to testify in a suit where one was o gainst the other? The counsel qnoled from Robinaou'a reports a case where a wife had le!t her husband on account of cruelty. IIo brought a lewd woman in the house to live with him. Tho wife was admittf d to testify as to the facts of the matter. This was followed by an extract from the opinion of Justice James, in which be admitted the late changes in law with regard to the relations be: wean man and wife in this country and in England, and referred briefly to them. Tbe counsel at t his point suspended his argument and a recess was taken. After the reces a commotion was raised in the cotirt room by the entrance of Mrs. Til'on on the arm of Mr. 'Ovington, and accompanied by Mrs. Field and Mrs. Shearman. Tbe party took their accustomed seats, facing tbe jury and behind the counsel for thedeferjs9. When order had been restored Mr. Beach continued bis argument. He was aware that the plaintiff's testimony would reflect on the purity of his wife. Tho answer of the law was that she was not Interested in thia suit, and she might claim all the privileges of a wife from the pontiff. It was not the husband that revealed his wife's dishonor but her seducer. There was something repuldvo in tbe thought of a suit for aed action, but when tbe law gave no other course it ill become the ministers of the law to reproach such a course. Mr. Evarts rcsii to reply to the argument. Ha saidlhat the version spoken of by bis learned friend, to a suit of this kind, was also regarded in the same light by the law. We are discussing, seid the counsel, the adraissibilHy of this witness with regard to his evi Jenes and marriage relations as fixed by the laws of thia state, and he submitted that there was no rule of common law opening the mouths of either the husband or the wile. He argued that the law as quoted by tbe other tide had been changed. THE CODK OF 18GC. It must be plain to tbe court that the law governing the admissibility of- a husband and wife as witnesses was ruled out by tbe statute of 1867. He quoted from .legal authorities to sho w that a wife 'could not test!fy against her husband when either was a party to the suit. The question, said the counsel, was raised by the other side that tbe husband was not on one side and tbe wife on -the other, but the result would be the same in proving the criminality of the wife. There was no case In our courts which showed that a wile or husband coula be a witness against ech other, under the laws of evidence. Well might th9 legislature, said the speaker, stand appalled at opening the mouth of a huHband or wtte in a case ot adultery. Tbe legislature, Impressed with the difficulty of invadlDj; the common law, laid down the rule that neither the wife or r. usband shoold appear the one against ths other. The counsel felt entirely inccmpe:ent to examine the witness In a cae like tbl, where he could shut his mouth and reTn'e to arawer any qnentions put lo hltij. Hfl looked with tfUmay, he taid, on ttio Kl? of tha witness' bomg al

lowed to override him. All the efforts of the law were to purity and exalt the structure tbat has been the perpetual " habitation for liberty and justice, furnished by the wisdom and coorage ot our ancestors. Wrtb this remark Mr. Evarts cloned. Judge Neilson stated that he would give the matter bis-utmpfct consideration, but warned the counsel that be would deliver no written opition, but that it would be a frankly spoken opinion n the merits of the case. The court mads an effort to induce the con nsel to go on with the cae to-morrow, or to meat next week half au-bour earllor and adjourn half an hocr later every day, brat to this the logal practitioners demurred. J udge Neilson, in answer to ex-Judge Fullerton, sarld that this opinion of his would be delivered immediately on their meeting Monday next. Adjourned. TITO GREAT DEBATE. SCINDAL' VORENSJC8 THE ARGUMENTA OF ME89U. EVARTM AND BEACH 80MK KLOQCFNT PAH3AGES FROM EACH 6PKAKKR THE ORATORY Of KR. BKACH. The debates In the Beeeher-Tllton trial on the admissibility of Theodore Tilton as a witnes have beee of an unusual character.

The speakers who bave participated in this discussion are Messrs. Evtrts, of the defease, and Beach and Pryor of the plaintiff side. The arguments have been very lengthy, especially those ol Mr. Evarts and Pryor, consisting, in the main, of references to legal authorities md learned discussions and comments on these various decisions. The New York papers of the 29th Inst, give the proceedings and argoiaents -complete From the report ol tho Tribune the following extract 1 taken of the exordium of Mr. Evart: ult seems to be ntterlv unauentionable that the wife ran not be a witness in tbM case.Q Tbewifaof this plalntifl can not be a witness to sustain her life and character. The wife of Mr. Brecher cau not be a witness to defend her husbund. because the common law has said.great as is the interest cf the administration of justice, all-powerful as It should be. to draw into court all evidence that can speak the truth within the rules of evidence, yet the administration ot lUBtice was made for society, not society for tbe administration of justice; and there are certain institutions of society 1 ing at the base ot our civilizationtnnstaining the whole fabric of its prosperity, its purity, its dignity and its strength, which must not be undermined, or corrapted, or disfigured, or defiled, under the notion that in the administration of justice the truth must be sought in every quarter and from every witness, 'inustne great minds, legislative, judicial, the great moralists, tbe great religious teachers, bave all combined to any that there are certain limits - imposed by the nature of human society in the fabric as it Is constituted for our defense and protection, tbat cannot be overpassed. That ot client and attorney.tbat of clergyman and penitent, tbat of physician and patient, are, however, trivial compared with the relation of busband and wife, barriers against the introduction of evidence from sources thus protected; because, without that respect of the law to those relations, no client could confide in a lawyer to defend him, no patient In a physician to pave him, no penitent in a priest or clergyman to aid him. But when we come to the relation of husband and wife, it is tbe foundation ot our civilized society, for though nature provides the sexual attraction, yet it is the civil and religions inatitution of marriage that makes civilized Christian communities Instead of loose and LUSTFUL. HERDING OF THE HUMAN RACE. Now, the common law, built up by mascu line undertakings thathave ralaed its great establishment, uses no fine and sentimental phrases, such as come from platform orators, or from eloquent lawyers, but it understands the institution that it has undertaken to frame, and it protects it accordingly. It provides that when a man or woman come together under thedivineawof purity, tbat the twain shall become one flesh, and thus tbat tbe population of tbe world shall bo furnished, and not otherwise, consistently with tbe Divine command. And when the common law pays that a man and his wife are one, or, in Lord Coke's language, "As two souls in one person," it is said no man shall put asunder those who are thus joined together, and, least of all, In tbe name of law, shall the administration of justice pull and tear asunder this conjugal relation by the step of the sheriff or the precept ot the jtidge that compels one to come and betray the other. It is not when the question comes before tbe court so much the interest, or tbe duty, or the particular circumstances of tbe in dividual caso ot marriage that ia thus brought np for attention, as tbe institution itself. It is the happy matrjage, It is the unbroken marriages, it is tbe whole system of marriage, by which husbsnd and wife are in the supreme confidence within their houseboKl and in each other's embrace, that po interests of society, no law of the land, can invade. And if every Englishman and every American prides hinself upon tbe inviolability of his tbresbhold against tbe king of all the power of government, except within certain strict mandates of tbe law authorizing a forcible passage ot it, how much more important that all that makr the inviolability of the threshhold iripor. tant, to-wit, the inviolability cf &e family and the protection of the "marriage, should be sustained by the law against the king or the tnandato, albeit, of the law t In respon.se to the opening argument of Mr. Evarts, Mr. Beach made a powerful reply, la the course of bis argument Mr. Beach said: Iu concluding this, fcir, and in answer to the illustrations of my learned friends to-day, permit ine to follow with an illustration. Iiuagiue, sir, a happy, honored, cultured home. The wife, a frail, foeble and delicate woman, eminently devotional and pious in all her Impulses, and, as ha3 leen shown heretofore, dbvotcd to the husband cf her early choice, and the father of her children. She had a pastor, learned, eminent and gifted beyond bis lellows. One who stood at the very head of his honored and sacred profession; one whose words w ere listened to with deference and respect. ut he had these powers of xalod! oyer her. lie " hau that persuasive power of eloquence, that insidious and sliver tongue which would lure an angel from bis paradise. He was her ae Cepted and chosen teacher and guide. She looked up to him with a yeneration second only to that with which she rertfsd her God. Nayl if an Incarnate Christ tad come down with the glory of Calvary upon His brow and the love of sacrifice In Iiis eye, she would not bow to Him with more obedience than this woman gave to HER PASTOR AND HER OOD. From her childhood, sir, she was under hii teaching and admonition. He was almost an inmate of her home. In tbe confidence of a husband, and as a friend and pupil of this aged and venerable, and gifted man, he was welcomed with tenderness and affection. He exerted npon her, sir. all his arts. His apecioos wiadom, his prayerful devotion all tho arts of his gifted nature were bent for the seduction of this happy, boloved wife and mother and she fell. And do you wonder, sir? Is she to be blamed for the act? Is this a rros?cution of her? I) this action,

therefore, brought by a wronged busband, an

action against hr? For her condemnation? Oh, no. Rir! Consider bow strong be was! Consider bow weak she was ! Ctocsider how submissive sfjewss to his teachings, aDd 1ms ein imaglno with what Pyelons and in'iuuous torjgne ne convevea to her the theoryof his plans that fornication was but the natural expression of love3 He taught her to believe in pious adultery and by steady steps he lei her alorg the flowery path, to the precipice upon which uhe fell! That eeducor la brought into a coort of justice to answer for his crimes. The husbandwronged, the seducer guiltv, stand before the immaculate justice of thttlaw, and before It each is to answer for the deeds done to this woman. Aad we are told, sir, accord ing tome logic or my leaned friend, tbat this aged, and venerable, and gifted oducer may tako tbe witness stand and polish and apologize for his guilt, and present an ire evidences of his learned in getwsity, and that the hutad mmt tie still. silent. And that this Is law! The law. wnicn w no rtspector of person.". The law. which hold out even justice to all fitignnts before it, and tbat the f-edueer with all his great powers my learned friocd subsidizes them to establish that adminMratljn or Justice and wrong, f aar no, slrl Be fore your honor will admit any such con ciusion; neiore you wm approve of any suca ttuniiui.siraTion you must re driven to it by the force et n lrresistable legal logic. -AuanKuoui mere is in my be lief no such rule of law in the state. There is no such justice in tbe policy of legislation. The shame; the disgrace, the destruction which this wile suffers, and meet sutler, starts earlier in the history of this unfortunate transaction. It in not tbe huband who reveals tbe wife's dishonor it is the seducer! Long belore thia action was commenced the dark cloud had enshrouded this wife. This action was not commenced until tbe wife, KTIKCLATKO BT HER ÜKDCCEK, had deserted the borne of her husband. This gction was not commenced until this wife, led by that seducer, appeared before his chosen tribunal and vented her spleen and indignation against this husband. Long before this action was commenced this shadow had fallen over that household, and the happy and honored home was distracted and severed. The f argument does not apply here. sir. The epithet is not appropriate to the action or this case; it is not appropriate to any action, because, I assert, it is an Invariable truth tbat the dishonor and ruin which follows the path of tbe seducer commences long before the husband is apprised of his own dishonor. It comes in alienated love, it comes in inevitable discord and contention, it comes at last in tbe clear revelation to the distracted heart of the husband of his wife's seduction and dishonor. Whatever may be said by Theodore Tilton upon that will not add one jot or tittle to the agony, shame or remorse of that wife. "But thia is a suit lor money, sir!" My client Is represented as spreading over the reputation and honor of bis wife, in a greedy chase after the gold of the defendant. Why, sir, don't the counsel know better if not his associate and your honor know better? How long ago was it tbat in this case, and before your honor, tbe proffer was made to abandon this cae for damages, if my learned a a . . . . . ineuus wouiu nut press lorwara tneir indictment for libel in asserting tbe adultery of the defendant with his wife? Theodore Tilton seeks no damages from the defendant; he wonld not stain and burn bis palm with bis gold; but he seeks, sir, vindication. The bin of the defendant has followed him with destructive efficacy. Tie defendant has gathered around him the comments and Condemnation of society ; his fortunes bave been prostrated, those consequences which always follow in tbe path of guilt, espe cially of this sin, bave clung to him with iron tenacity. . It is for no money; it is for no redress. If the wronged husband and ine violated Dome, does the law acord no vengeance. Why, sir. it is, I think, a shame, although I believe I differ with my learned colleague in that respect, but I think it a burning shame to the law cf this state and every other state where tbat law is wanting, mat tnestaueer may NOT BR PURSUED AS A CRIMINAL, , or that licentlouf ue?s cf this character is not punished by tbe heaviest judgment of the law, as it was condemned and punished by mat inruliDia law which knows no terror. Bnt no remedy U given ! What must Theodore Tilton io. nust be suffer the arrows and slings of society, and see the seducer triumphant and llonrhblng, and glorying in Dis impurity, the happiest man in all this rocm? Sensation. Does the law afford no mlrevs? Nona adequate, sir, and the only resource left to my client, given him by the law, was this action. If he had taken that other remedy, condemned by the law of the state, but sanctioned by the common law of humanity that which reaches the heart and lite ol the seducer and had he done that, sir, instead ot standing before your honor in his appeal for vindication and justice, he would bavibeen arraigned as a criminal, and in danger of the gibbet. FOREIGN. SPAIN; MILITARY M0VKMKNTS OPERATIONS AGAINST PAMPLONA. . Madrid, Jan. 31. TheEpoca says that cordial communications between .Mr. Ousting, the envoy of the United States, and Hsnor Castro, the minister of foreign affiirs. have resulted in an understanding in regird to tbe indemnity payable to the fotuiiies of the crew ot the Virginius. Df crees have been issued permitting the press to discuss the acts ot the ministry, forbidding attacks on royalty and religion and prohibiting tbe publication of intelligence which may bo serviceable to the Car lists. Newspapers which have been visited with the penalty of suspension three times shall be wholly suppressed or tbe fourth offense. CUBA. THR CCBA 9 ATTACK AND CAPTURE A FORT STURDY RESISTANCE BY THE DEFflNDERS. . . Havana, Jan. 31. The local newspaper of Sahctl EsplrUI, In the Cincn Villas district, has the folowlng report: The Insurgents, commanded by Gomes and Sangudi, attacsed the settle, ment of Jibara at 4 o'clock on the morning of the 20th inst. The assault was made at four points. Tbe rebsls attacked Fort Macbett. The besieged defended themselves heroically, but the enemy's numbers were too great. Tbe garrison, having exhausted the ammunition and being reduced tt tea effective men, surrendered to the insurgents. Tbe latUr respected tbe lives of those who surrendered. Tbe fort and all tho contents were destroyed and many bouses were burned. Oar losses are considerable in proportion to the numbers engaged, but we are without exact details. Eye witnesses say that the losses of the rebels were heavier. Thin we believe, considering the pertinacity of the attack and the obstinacy of tbe defense. When the rews became knowii here troops were immediately sent out to pick up the wounded and reconstruct the, defe nses and buiidics of the town.

THE INVESTIGATORS. . , ' LOUISIANA'S LONG STORY. THE PROCEEDINGS OF SATURDAY.

MAJOR HEID S TESTIMONY -THR SLIPPERY BKELYK PERSECUTED JUPGB MYERS BRIBERY OF COLORED VOTERS KELLOGG CROSS-EX AMTNKD THE FINANCES RE DUCING THE OREENES. is kw' Orleans, Jan. i,u. At the oo Dg res - eiocal investigation to-day, Leo E. Head tes titled as follows: I am major of the 3d in fantry and came tc- Louisiana about Septeaiber 19 and went to Monroe on the 25th ol October. I was requested by Marshal Reelye to assift him in making arrests. . I was shown a warrant by the marshal and allst ot 150 names of persons to be arrested. On election day Marshal fceelye sent a detach ment to the town of Cuba to make an arrest. I ean not say wi ether the troops were used for any specific political pur poses, beeive had a numoer of blunk war rants in his possession. While at Vienna it was not stated by SeHje tbat he had failed in executing legal processes. lie was upponular and probably would have been unable to make the arrests, but other men could have done so. I could see Seelye was active in nis co-operation with the republican party. The troops were kept,. in their barracks on election day with the ex ceptions of the expedition to Cuba. There. were no disturbances in the parish' at the election or since. When Seelye was In the lennajau ne proposed to me that I should nn out one or ine DianK warrants In my possession wun eeiye 8 came and arrest him so as to get him out ot tbe clutches of the authorities. He afterward carried out this plan, and filled out a warrant charging nimseii wun emoezziement. Juoge H. C. Myers testified: I reside in Natchitoches psnsn. nave neen there for 30 years. The principal iroupie among . tee peo-i pie originates rrom tno taxes. As , to intimidation, he gave as evidence the resolutions of a mass meeting near the town or Natchitoches, and several extracts from the parish democratic papers. Myers said mat ne naa lived in the parish 15 years During tbe last election, he does not think many negroes voted the conservative ticket, lie stated that he was afraid to return to .Natchitoches, and that he waa threatened through the Daoers. Un to the time of tbe mass meeticg the republicans were in no danger. He never heard of the negroes that were hung In the rmrlsh. bnt there have been about thirty murders in the past few years. Tbe population ranges from ly.OOO to 20.000. Mr. FT36 - then asked a few questions aa to the relative registration, etc The witness stated that he k new of but five or six negroes there who would vote the democratic ticket. Also as to the canse of his leaving home, the witness stated that it was from fear of. personal violence and. injury; that republicans there- were safe up to the time of the meeting on the 22d of July. He and his family were ostracised. He did not think it safe to return to Natchitoches. There were no courts held there now except magistrate's courts. There were NO 0UTBA0X8 there that he knew of personally. Thirty-three persona havebeea killed there since 1S68. Twenty-two were eolored men. There has been no punishment for the mur aerers. Some man had been Drought to trial bat were acquitted. Mrs. Oof avia Myers. iue wue oi uuage Myers, ot iNaiccvocr.es, as to the causes which compelled the Judge to leave home, and corroborated fully, the statement made by him in his testimony aa to ostracism, persecution, etc. Before Judge Myers came down to the con vention in July he - was much liked, and bis decisions in court were complimented In the papers. Her husband was once at the point of death for weeks and no democrats came to sit up with him. On the 27th of Jnly there came a mob into town to ask tbe officials to resign. Mr.Ignacb, of Natcbitccbes,was next sworn, and corroborated the previous testimony as to intimidation, etc., in that parith. He was a republican, and was shot at the night after the election. He heard one shot that wash red at Pierson. A general intimida tion prevailed. Tbe mayor had 200 White Leaguers on duty as policemen on election day. Ordinarily ttere were but -two. The special policemen .vere all democrats. He was threatened and prevented from per forming the dmies of supervisor by threats from the W bite Le-iguers. who told him if he attempted to qualify they would put him and his . books out . of tho way. On dm cross examination he stated that about five hundred colored men were prevented from voting by intimidation. - He saw no violence at the meeting toward the colored men. - He was 200 yards from the court house when Piereon was shot at. I was shot at with buck-shot. Some fell after striking him. He saw a man when bo fired. Then he broke and ran. Ho had remained there ever since. Tbcmas lightfoot, a colored man and a resident of this city, testified that while under bond for cow stealing, Mr. James came to bis house and told him tbat if he would use his influence, work and vote for the democrats he would obtain his final discbarge of the crime he was charged with, and that he (James) did so. He was offered $1C0 or S500 by the president of his club if he should come before the committee and testify tor the democrats, but he had cot been oflered anything by tho republicans. The witness also produced a safety certificate, which was filed in evidence. He got ?30 from the club and gave 52 each to fifteen colored men to vote the democratic ticket. Horace Phillips managed the voters furnished by blm on election day, end saw that they voted. The witness was then crossexamined " by . the counsel lor the conservatives, but nothing Important was elicited. Sandy Rice, another colored democratic voter, was next sworn, ond identified his safety certificate, and testified as to his connection' with the election, lie received ?7 50 for voting, and he kept the money, lie did not divide with anvcodv. Tbe democrats cflered him $4 00 it he wonld come before the committee and testify in their behalf. 60V. KELLOGG wM Cross-examined at great length. In reply to Mr. Marr as to why be had not se.ut the metropolitan militia to Grant Parish during tbe troubles there, he said that first there was a persistent effort to mislead blm, Judge Manning and other prominent oon servativen assuring him there would be no trouble, and, secondly, there was a combination among tbe steamboat raeu to retue transportation to the state militia. He made many efiorts through Gen. Ixnigstroet toobtaln transportation, but wasrelused. 8ubenuentlv when Gen. Emory desired to Bend up United States troops tLb general had almost to bny the boat they went on. In answer to Mr. Marshall, be asserted tbat tbe taxation in tbe country parishes waa not exotsaive. aa a rule. The delinquent taxes amounted to inliy mills of thel4) mill levied. In tbe heavy republican parishes, where the people were law abiding, there were comparatively no delinquent tax. In the Hill parishes, wtere the White Leaguo operated, the de

linquent tax lists amounted to double the parish debt. The

more than : assessment 1,110 country parishes was ridiculously iow. ine lands on tue Tech un. assessed at fü an sere, which would be und the product of these lands were five 8 Taln,able "5 the ProdQ of the cor!1 responding lands in Illinois It was true the taxes before tbe war were about fivj mills and now were fourteen mill-, butr' T!ed,7'.I,,m"onb reduced aci where Mon thfl warTttonÄ lu-ianceu Ademption r,rif.h. nere. neiorn tha - t. r . t ng slaves was nine "ij luiiiions ana now was one million. In tho city of NeJ Orleans the assessments were high and ,T8ttm wa,bd- He had strenuously f icd to change it, and came within siz votes in the legislature last year ot doini so If aty0f e democrats who refused to the whole of the present onrressive system of tax assessments in New Orleans cocld have been changed. He asserted that the commerce of the city of New Orleans wa. greater to-day than it had been for 20 yelrni IMPORT TRADB had fallen ofl.owing to the riots and political troubles, obstructions at the bar and more than all to the railroads tarP!Eg the commerce. But the Western produce and steamboat trade had largely increased. In reply to Mr. Hoar he said that the rich Blaster. complained tbat all their plantations-had ' been mortgaged before the war and they had never been able to redeem them. The lorV r,ch n were daily becoming poorer and the formerly poor men were becoming richer. He said that number of colored men were acquiring property, and large plantations were being divided un into small holdings, la answer to Mr. Frys ! he said that the assertion that the funding ' board had funded eight or ten millions of illegal , obligations was nhanintx,!., 0 . .... . ' "mj taiFT. nly one million and a half had thus far been funded, and thev Ära t i xiw woum iurnisn a lütof ihom tk..,.(. at the Instance of himself, had passed upon two millions and a half Ar k- tLJ?.l-tl by Warmoth to the Chattanooga railroad, as ' was alleged, without consideration, and had declared them null and ih rr Vr. one to prove a sinirle coriunt ct cr.in him. He was poorer to-day than when be became governor. D. J. M. A. Jewett, the U. 3. commissioner In VnrM, Tni.i. v. issued the warrants upon which several arrests were made in that aA.tL-wn . amlned, and gave a list of a large number or murders alleeed to hv mitted since 186S. He conW w,faat proportion were political. A Lien Greene, state senator lrom that parish-, took the stand and rieniA.1 tv of the sub committee that there were six Oreenealn office in Lincoln parish. He said that he had only one son now in o3ce in that parish, and one at West Polat. He waanearly tbe largest nronortv nam ; t i. coin. He owned a tannery and a shoe mannIn a4 a AL It i. fcQO mcnmery in which had cost him 510,000. His business waa tnnn cause the workmen he brought from Maa---numuu account oi the ostracism. Greene was still ander r. animation when the committee adion rnd till Monday. A, PRIZE FOUND. : ISOOVBRT OF A TTNTQUR WORK A BOOK FOB WHICH ONE THOUSAND P0UNM ARE OFFEREDAMOURS OF GEO ROB TV. A LOUtS- . VILLK LAWYER THE LUCKY HOLDS B. Louisville, Jan. 31. The book fcr which the sum of 1,000 In gold has been offerod by Mr. O. Gal bourne, of London, and stated, in a circular extensively distributed by him, to relate to a member of the royal family ol England, against the publication cf which the lord chancelor issued an injunction, and of which only one copy is known to ta in the United States, was yesterday ciscorered to be in the possession of a young lawyer of this city. Tha owner could not be found until after midnight, and the fct were then obtained from him too lata to be telegraphed. The Courier-Journal of this morning contains a lengthy account of the book and its possessor, from which the following extracts embrace the main facts. The book is "Memories of George the Fourth," containing a minute history of all the scandalous passages in his lie, together with an exposure of the corruption of his political admlrbtraiion. The identity ol the book seei-s positive, for it bears the imprfot of the publishers named in the circular as well as the date of its issue 1830. The "Memories" are in two volumes, and a hasty glance at the contents suffices to clearly show why it is tbat so large a reward is offered for It. Two or three ypar ago, ad English gentleman named Taylor, a book salesman of this city, discovered thr . volumes in a case ot book whieh his firm had imported from C. D. Caseenone, a Louden book dealer, now out of business. Tbe vole rasa had not been ordered and it was presumed that they bad been placed in the ca aorsidently. Mr. Taylor was perfectly familiar with all the branches of English lit9riture, and when his eye lighted upon, the work he at once appreciated, its value. The date of the irapart&tlea was about the beginning of 1873. He showed the books to a number of literary gentlemen ol the city, and among them was the yocc j lawyer who is now its fortunate possessor. The latter gentleman hesitated some days about makiDg the purchase, but bis love of tho rare and curious in literature triuraph9d, and he bonght them. Since then tho volumes bave filled a place upon the shelves of the library of the gentleman in question. Ills quite certain that the reason the royal family are so solicitous for its destruction, lies in the fact Vhat the marriage ol Kiep George with Mrs. Fitzherbert is provea by letters and documents taken from theroyal arcbivea. It also testifies that a child was born ir Mrs. Fitzherbert while in loyal wedlock. The book contain finely executed portraits of those women whose names havo become familiar to all students of the shady side ot English history in connection witb mat or the amorous George. It was only three years ago last Month that Edward Eggleston's "Hoosler Schoolmaster" was published, and . in that time 90,000 copies of his four novels of Western pioneer life have been sold in this country. They have been generally reprinted In London, aud the"Honsie ßcbool master" was translated ?n tbe Revue des Deux Mondes. The curioui desire of the leading French reriod.CAt to. select for translation tbe dialect MteraXu.it,. which is of all kied the Iast CJpäblaof carryicgits peculiar Hivor into another language, wss never better illustrated than in this instance. "Dog-gone-it" became a beauliiully colorlepa and commonplace French oath, and a corn shucking was s entirely foreign to French knowKdse that it became a wheat-threshing. Mr. Ejrslcs'ca, in tbo intervals between his lecture tours, is now at work npon another novel, which will deal witn a new neu of western li:-3. N. Y. Tribune.