Now, gentlemen, he comes on the stand and swears that he made this affidavit, not being overpersuaded by Bosler, but because Dorsey with tears and groans besought him to make it. Yet on the 5th of July, 1882, he says he made it because he was overpersuaded by Bosler, and he says, too, "Had I remained with the Government my reputation would have been clear, and I have every reason to believe I would have had a good position." He says, "I have another opportunity to be entirely relieved from the indictment." These gentlemen say he never was promised immunity. That simply shows you cannot believe Mr. Rerdell when he is not under oath, and what he has sworn to here shows you cannot believe him when he is under oath.
Now I come to the affidavit. I will not spend a great deal of time upon it. Mr. Rerdell, with extreme ease, without the slightest hesitation, went through that entire affidavit, picking out with all the facility imaginable, every paragraph written by Dorsey and every paragraph written by himself. I was astonished at his exhibition of memory. I finally asked to look at the copy of the paper he had, and when I got that in my hand I found that every word that he swore was written by Dorsey had been underscored with a blue pencil. That accounted for the facility with which he testified. I found afterwards that that paper had been given him by Mr. Woodward and that he had gone through and marked such portions as Mr. Dorsey wrote, according to his testimony, or had marked those that he wrote, leaving the others unmarked, so that at a glance he could tell which way to swear. Before I get through with the papers in this case there is another thing to which I want to call your attention. All the papers as to which witnesses were called on the subject of handwriting are marked. I will show you that every one has a little secret mark upon it, so that the man who swore might know which way to swear simply by looking at the signature and at no other part.
There has been a great deal of preparation in this case.
Now, Rerdell swears as to the parts of the affidavit that Dorsey wrote and the parts that he wrote. His object in swearing was to entirely relieve Messrs. James and MacVeagh from having made any bargain with him to steal Mr. Dorsey"s books, and to entirely relieve them from any suspicion, as well as to relieve every other official of the Government from any suspicion of having promised him any pay in any shape or manner for the making of this affidavit. He swears in the first place, that Dorsey wrote this:
My story captured them completely, and I took occasion to refer to the steamboat route and the Jennings" claim. Mr. James remarked that he knew all about the Jennings" matter, that Jennings had been badly treated, and he ought to get the money, and should; that he would investigate the steamboat route and see if anything could be done; that that was the worst part, and his special agents had reported it; nevertheless he would see if something could not be done.
On page 2506, in his cross-examination, Mr. Rerdell swears that the words--Mr. James remarked--were not written by Dorsey, but were written by himself. On the same page he swears that the words--That Jennings had been badly treated--were not written by Mr. Dorsey, but were written by himself.
On his examination-in-chief he swore that these words were written by Dorsey.
On his examination-in-chief he swore that Dorsey wrote this:
And to further deceive them and learn their plans, carried the letter-book containing--And then he wrote--the much-talked of Oregon correspondence.
Afterward, when cross-examined, he swears, I think upon the same page, 2506, that he himself wrote the words:
Carried the letter-book containing.
That Dorsey did not write them. He also swears in his examination-in-chief that Dorsey wrote these words:
Making only one mistake, or rather slip, by which Mr. MacVeagh could, as a good lawyer, have detected me, and that was by stating that I had kept a set of books.
On his examination-in-chief he swears that Mr. Dorsey wrote those words.
On cross-examination he admits that Dorsey did not write them and that he wrote them.
On his examination-in-chief he swears that he wrote this himself:
He said, "Well, Mr. Rerdell, I am in a position where I cannot make promises, but if you will place yourself in full accord with the Government, you shall not lose by it, and I would advise you not to receive any salary from Dorsey this month. It will be all right."
On cross-examination he takes it back, and swears, on page 2503, that Dorsey wrote the words:
It will be all right.
He was afraid those words might be given too wide a significance and might in some way touch the Attorney-General, and consequently he swore that he swore wrong when he swore that he wrote them, and that as a matter of fact Dorsey wrote them. Then, on his examination-in-chief with the marked paper before him, and having plenty of time to manufacture his testimony, he swore that he wrote the words:
He asked me--In his own handwriting, and that Dorsey wrote these words--when I was going to New York to get those books. I replied, "On Sunday night." He said, "Don"t put it off too long, as they are all-important."
On his examination-in-chief he swore that Dorsey wrote those words, and on cross-examination he admitted that he wrote every one of those words himself. When he was cross-examined he had not the paper before him.
His memory was not refreshed by the blue pencil mark. So on his examination-in-chief he swore that he wrote these words:
As I was about leaving he--Meaning the Attorney-General--said, "Mr.
Rerdell, you have put yourself in full accord with us, and I have this to say, you shall be well taken care of and your matters shall be attended to."
On cross-examination, on page 2500, he swears that Dorsey wrote the words:
Your matters shall be attended to.
But he still admitted that he, Rerdell, wrote the words and put them in the mouth of the Attorney-General:
You shall be well taken care of.
He says in his letter of July 5, 1882:
If I had remained with the Government I have every reason to believe I would have a good position.
What next? Mr. Rerdell, in his examination-in-chief, swears that he himself wrote these words:
The next evening I called on Mr. Woodward to see if he had anything more to say, and he told me a place had been found for my father-in-law, and to give the application to Senator Clayton; to make the application for the Interior Department, as it was best not to put him into the Post-Office Department for fear of criticism; that the appointment should be made at once. It was all arranged. The next day I saw Clayton, who said the same thing.
On cross-examination, at page 2505, he swears that Dorsey wrote a part of this; that Dorsey wrote the following words:
As it was best not to put him into the Post-Office Department for fear of criticism.
When he testified on direct examination he had this marked paper before him; in the absence of the paper, on the cross-examination, he takes his solemn oath that he did not write it, but that Senator Dorsey did. What confidence can you put in that kind of testimony? I would like to have you, gentlemen, some time, or I would like to have anybody who has the slightest interest in the thing, read this affidavit and see whether it is the work of two or the work of one. You let two men write, one writing one paragraph and the other another paragraph, and then you read it; there is no man in the world accustomed to read books that cannot instantly detect the difference in style, the different mode of expression, the different use of language. n.o.body can see any difference in the writing; n.o.body can see the slightest difference in the mode of expression; the sharpest verbal mechanic that ever lived cannot see a joint between these paragraphs. They emanated from the same brain; they were written by the same hand; and if any man, who has ever read one book clear through, will read that, he will see that one person wrote it all. But Mr. Bliss tells you that here is a pa.s.sage that shows the handiwork of S. W. Dorsey, because Dorsey was a politician:
He also said that you, Mr. President, had told Mr. Dorsey you could not interfere in this investigation and prosecution; that if you did, the public would say that the President and a Secretary, who shall be nameless, but whose name I could guess, had taken the money of the star-route ring while they were in Congress, or the Postmaster-General and Attorney-General had taken it since, and therefore he (Dorsey) must look to the courts for vindication.
That is the pa.s.sage upon which Mr. Bliss relies, among others, to show that this was formed in the brain of S. W. Dorsey; and yet Rerdell swears that that pa.s.sage he wrote himself. It will not do, gentlemen.
Now, in order that you may know just about how much force to give to that, let me read you a little from page 2379; and I read this for the purpose of letting you know the ideas that this man Rerdell entertains of right and wrong.
I want you to get at the moral nature of this man; I want you to thoroughly understand him. When you examine these affidavits, when you think of his testimony, I want you to know exactly the kind of nature he has, and I want you to remember that he came here upon this stand and swore in this case that he did not consider that it was wrong to interline pet.i.tions; that he did not think it was wrong to fill up affidavits; and that is the reason he made the affidavit of July 13, 1882. Although he then knew that these things had been done, still he did not regard them as wrong. You see it is worth something to get at a man, to get at his philosophy of right and wrong; it is worth something to know how he thinks; why he acts; and when you have found that out about a man, then you know whether to believe him or not.
I believe the jury did look at this paper and saw all the parts that had been marked by blue pencil, and those parts, I believe, he said Dorsey wrote. That is the paper he had before him at the time he testified in chief. But when he came to be cross-examined, not having the paper then before his eyes, he swore in very many important things exactly the other way. We were all astonished at the facility with which he remembered, he pretending to know what parts he wrote and what parts Mr. Dorsey wrote. I want you to understand this man, and before I get through with him, you will. I want you to know him.
Now we come to an exceedingly important thing in this case, in the eyes of the prosecution. It is the princ.i.p.al pillar supporting the testimony of Mr. Rerdell. Without that pillar absolutely nothing is left, everything falls into perjured ruin.
The first question that arises with regard to the pencil memorandum (31 X) is who wrote it, and in order to ascertain who wrote it we must take into consideration all the facts and circ.u.mstances that have been established in this case. It is already in evidence, as you remember it, that Rerdell kept a route-book. You will also remember that Mr. Dorsey had books of his own; that he had a bookkeeper of his own, Mr. Kellogg; that Mr. Kellogg swears that he kept those books and that n.o.body else ever made a scratch of the pen in them; that he kept them up till the fall of 1879; they were then sent to New York; that Mr. Torrey took possession of those books on the 27th of January, 1880, and kept them continuously to the last of April, 1882, and that n.o.body else ever put a mark in them. That is the evidence. The evidence also is that there was in those books a complete mail account. The evidence is also that in those books kept by Mr. Kellogg were the charges and credits growing out of the purchase of John W. Dorsey"s interest and Peck"s interest in the mail routes.
Mr. Merrick. Pardon me; point me to that evidence.
Mr. Ingersoll. I will refer to it hereafter. I do not wonder, gentlemen, that they dislike this pencil memorandum.
Mr. Merrick. No, sir; I only want to keep you within correct limits.
Mr. Ingersoll. I understand that. I do not blame anybody for disliking that pencil memorandum.
Mr. Merrick. You can convict Rerdell as much as you like.
Mr. Ingersoll. When you come to show that he is guilty his countenance will light up with the transfiguration of joy. There will be no more delighted auditor than Mr. Rerdell when his crimes are painted blackest.
It shows you the moral nature of the man.
Now, as I say, the evidence is that there was a route-book kept; that that route book contained all the information that Mr. Dorsey or any one else would want about the routes themselves; consequently, that there was no propriety in keeping any other set of books. Mr. Rerdell could keep books for himself, but not for S. W. Dorsey. Dorsey had a set of books, and had another book-keeper. Why should he have another set opened by Rerdell? Rerdell kept a route-book that gave him all the information that he could possibly desire.
Mr. Wilson. Rerdell did not handle the money.