Illinois vs. August Spies et al. trial transcript no. 1 Direct examination by Mr. Grinnell. Cross-examination by Mr. Foster. Testified on behalf of the Prosecution, People of the State of Illinois. Testified as to Harry Gilmer's general reputation for truth and veracity. Testified on various topics (page numbers provide a partial guide): Gilmer, Harry (vol.N 173).
Testimony of Richard S. Tuthill, 1886 Aug. 10.
Volume N, 173-180, 8 p.
Tuthill, Richard S.
Attorney, former US District Attorney for the North District of Illinois.
Go to Next Witness | Return to Previous Witness | Return to Trial TOC | Return to the HADC Table of Contents
[Image, Volume N, Page 173]
Illinois vs. August Spies et al. trial transcript no. 1
Direct examination by Mr. Grinnell. Cross-examination by Mr. Foster. Testified on behalf of the Prosecution, People of the State of Illinois.
Testified as to Harry Gilmer's general reputation for truth and veracity. Testified on various topics (page numbers provide a partial guide): Gilmer, Harry (vol.N 173).
RICHARD S. TUTHILL,
a witness called and sworn on behalf of the People, was examined in chief by Mr. Grinnell, and testified as follows:
Q. What is your name?
A. Richard S. Tuthill.
Q. You are a lawyer?
A. Yes sir, I am.
Q. How long have you lived in Chicago?
A. About thirteen years.
Q. How long have you lived in the State of Illinois?
A. I was born in the State.
Q. You have been recently United States District Attorney for this District? the Northern District of Illinois?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You were also in the army during the rebellion?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You were also City Attorney of the City of Chicago?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know Harry L. Gilmer?
A. I do.
Q. Do you know his reputation for truth and veracity among his associates and acquaintances in the City of Chicago?
MR. FOSTER: Yes or no, in the neighborhood where he has resided?
MR. SALOMON: The question is objected to in the form it is put.
THE COURT: As it appears he lived in divers parts of the
city. Now the question is whether he is acquainted with his reputation for truth and veracity among his associates and acquaintances in the city of Chicago.
MR. SALOMON: It is necessary that this witness should have resided where Mr. Gilmer has resided, so that he might learn his reputation from the neighborhood.
MR. FOSTER: The point I make is, the question calls for an answer yes or no.
THE COURT: The question is whether he knows.
Objection overrule; defendant except.
WITNESS: I do.
MR. GRINNELL: Q. Is it good or bad?
A. It is good so far as I know.
Q. Would you believe him under oath?
A. I would.
By Mr. Foster.
Q. When did you make his acquaintance?
A. About five years ago.
Q. Who did you hear say when he testified in this case that his character was good?
A. I will tell you exactly how I came to know his character.
Q. Who did you hear speak about it?
A. I can't remember the particular names of individuals.
Q. Can you name any man woman or child in the city of Chicago that ever told you before Mr. Gilmer testified as a witness in this case, that his character for truth and veracity was good?
A. I have not talked with anybody about his character except Mr. Grinnell, since the evidence in this case.
Q. I mean before he testified as a witness in this case, did you hear man, woman or child say that his character for truth and veracity was good?
A. I heard a great many men speak of his character.
Q. Will you listen to my question -- did you hear any man woman or child say that his reputation for truth and veracity was good?
A. I can't say that I heard his reputation for truth and veracity specifically questioned.
Q. That is what you have been asked about, in regard to truth and veracity.
A. I heard his general character discussed.
Q. Are you a married man?
A. I am.
Q. Have a family of course?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you lived with your family in Chicago?
A. I was married in 1876 the last time.
Q. My object of course is not to get into your family relations, but have you ever entertained Mr. Gilmer at your house?
A. I don't think he has ever been in my house.
Q. Have you ever attained the same church with him?
A. I don't know that I did.
Q. Did you ever accompany him to theatres or other places of entertainment?
A. I don't think I ever did, no I never did.
Q. You never heard anybody before he testified as a witness in this case state -- you can't give me the name of anybody that you ever heard state that his reputation for truth and veracity was good or was not good?
A. I think I can. I think I heard Gov. Merrill state his reputation was good, and James L. Sexton.
Q. For truth and veracity?
A. His general reputation.
Q. We are not asking about that.
A. I said I didn't know that I had ever heard his reputation for truth and veracity talked about at all.
Q. You never heard anybody talk about his reputation for truth and veracity?
A. I don't think I ever heard any more than I have of Judge Gary or Mr. Grinnell's.
Q. You are not retained in this case?
A. No, but I am stating the fact.
Q. You know how to answer the question, how it ought to be answered.
A. I will try to do it.
MR. BLACK: We will ask that that answer be stricken out.
THE COURT: Yes, that is a matter of comment.
MR. FOSTER: I suppose what you mean by that -- that men whose reputations are never talked about are good, and if they are talked about they are not so good?
A. I believe the court has decided that it is not proper for me to state anything except the facts.
Q. Do you desire to make the points yourself, or do you desire counsel to make them?
A. What is your question?
MR. FOSTER: The reporter will read it.
The reporter here read the question.
A. Yes, I think as a general thing that is true.
Q. If a man has an unblemished reputation, it is not talked about at all?
A. That is generally the case.
Q. When they come up and question his veracity, and talk about his truth and veracity, and it becomes a matter of comment, you think that person does not bear a first class reputation?
A. It depends altogether when that discussion would arise. If it arose after the trial commenced, then I should not.
Q. If it happens at the time when it was discussed by the persons with whom he associated, and which whom he lived, then you would say that that discussion was not favorable?
A. There may have been something -- they may have had
some difference, or something of that sort.
Q. Don't argue the case -- I am speaking generally.
A. I cannot answer truthfully, without answering in a qualified manner, to some extent.
Q. I understand your position -- if a man has a good reputation, it is not called in question?
A. Except sometimes, a man who has a good reputation may have a difference with another man, and then his reputation is called in question.
Q. By the man he has had the trouble with?
A. Yes sir.
Q. I am not supposing he had trouble with anybody, those he associated with, those that lived in his community and know him, and they call it in question without having a personal difficulty, his character reputation for truth and veracity -- then that is against him?
A. Yes sir, I think it is -- I should say so.
Q. You have read the newspapers haven't you?
A. I read some of them most every day.
Q. There have been from one to four witnesses a day testifying here ever since the defense commenced their testimony against Gilmer?
A. I have not read the testimony very thoroughly. I have kept a general track of it -- that is all. I have some business of my own to attend to, and it takes a great deal of time.
Q. Do you know anything about the Patriotic Sons of America?
A. I do not.
Q. Did you ever hear of Gilmer's expulsion from that order?
A. No, I did not.
Q. You saw no statement in the Chicago papers a couple of years ago?
A. No sir, not that I recollect of.
Objected to as incompetent.
MR. FOSTER: Do you move to strike out the answer.
MR. GRINNELL: Leave it as it stands.
MR. FOSTER: Q. What you mean by your testimony is that you have heard his general character talked about, and it is the general character which is good?
A. Yes, that is it.
Q. Now, the question was as to his reputation for truth and veracity?
A. I think that is involved in his general character.
Q. You think that is involved in his general character?
A. Most certainly. I think if a man had a bad reputation for truth and veracity, I should not testify he had a good character.
Q. Yet you never associated with him?
A. I associated with him in some respects. I was brought in contact with him, I was chairman of the committee on employment of the Veteran Association.
Q. Did you ever hear that he had been in jail in Cook County?
A. I never heard it.
Q. Or Cedar Rapids, Iowa?
A. I never heard of that.
Q. Did you ever go about and among his associates to investigate his character?
A. I asked those whom I supposed knew about him. We discussed it, our committee did. He wanted employment, and we were looking up to see whether he was a man we could recommend for any kind of employment. He was poor and needy, and he was a soldier.
Q. When was this?
A. This was about five years ago.
Q. Have you known him for the last two years?
A. I have seen him occasionally.
Q. Have you known him so as to know what he has been doing for the last two years?
A. No, I have not.
Q. Nor where he has been living the last three years?
A. No sir.
Q. The last five years?
A. I never knew where he lived particularly -- it was never called to my attention. I knew he was a member of this association and out of employment and wanted work.
Q. For the last five years, and since this time he came to you to apply for employment, have you ever investigated in regard to his character or inquired or knew anything about what he was doing or where he was?
A. No sir, I have not.