IN EE EDWARD S. MAT. 741 �He further averred that at both interviews lie liàd he relateci the substance of bis conversation with Miller, but, from the first, baving the purpose in view of getting Eotbscbild and Burnstine to admit tbeir connection with Miller, if true. He tbinks that the respondent may, by bis manner, bava invited acontinuance of the Miller negotiation; that in these interviews he became satisfied that neither Rothschild nor Burnstine bad anything to do with the man that had ap- proached him, and became thoroughly satisfied the object the man had was to injure the defendants. He furtber averred that he made no secret of bis going to Burnstine's ; went in and out the front way both times, and was not disguised in any manner, and in neither interview did the respondent talk bimself, or allow said Burnstiae to talk to bim, about the f acts of the case tben on trial ; that up to that night he had never spoken to Burnstine, nor bas he spoken a word to him since. He further denied any contempt, and if bis going to Burnstine's house was a disobedience of the order of the court it was not so to respondent's knowledge or understanding of the orders, and he did it for the purest and best motives, and for the purpose of serving the ends of justice, by expos- ing fraud and corruption, which it seemed impossible to ac- complish in any other way; as, if the man who bad attempted to corrupt the respondent represented the defence, it could bave been ascertained in no better way than by respondent in person applying to Burnstiae, and he did it with the mo- tive and intention that if he sbould fasten the corrupt approacb of Miller upon the defence he would bave exposed it the next morning, and he did not tbink the ends of justice would be subserved to expose the facts otherwise until Miller could be identified; that he did not inform any person of the matter for the reason that be thought a grave crime bad beeu committed, and he desired to identify the man and bring him to justice; and bebelieved that if be did give any information to the court at that late stage of the case, tbere being no time for an investigation, it would simply put the guilty parties upon their guard, and might prejudice the minds of the court and jury against the defendants, beoause the respondent would ��� �
