88 FEDERAL REPORTEII. �Clay was then and there shown his signature at the end of the 18 direct questions, and he identified it; but a perusal of ail the questions and answers on cross-examination leads to the conclusion that MacClay may very well have thought that he was being cross-examined in reference to the occasion ■when he swore to his affidavit of May 23, 1879, before Mr. Abbott. This is, however, of no importance to the merits of the motion. It is shown very clearly and fully, by the aiii- davits produced in opposition to the motion, that the direct examiuation of Mr. MacGlay was regularly taken, in proper form, and in a proper manner, on the eighteenth of March, 1880, on prior notice to the defendant's soliciter, but without his presence, as before stated, and that the usual oath was administered to Mr. MacClay by Mr. Shields, the examiner, before the witness was examined. The jurat, bearing date March 18, 1880, at the close of the direct examination, signed by Mr. Shields, was not put there till after that day ; but that is immaterial. �The drawing on tracing cloth, marked "Complainant's Exhibit; MacClay, J. A. 8., examiner; marked by examiner, March 31, 1880, Fischer v. Hayes," is shown to be the iden- tical drawing deposed to by MacClay, in his answer to direct question 13. It is precisely like the copy now produced, made by Hyde, March 25, 1880. Hyde and Mr. Whitelegge are shown to be mistaken in their idea that the drawing was made on yellow Manilla paper. �Mr. Whitelegge sets forth in his affidavit that the direct testimony of the witness Abbott was prepared for the occa- sion, and was not taken in the usual manner or at the time it purports to have been taken, and is fictitious; and that the testimony of Mr. Abbott purports to have been begun and terminated on the thirty-lirst of March, 1880, whereas his direct testimony was in part put in on the eighteenth and nineteenth of March. Any erroneous impression in this re- spect arises from the order of printing, and from the order in which the manuscript sheets of the testimony are put to- gether. A reference to those sheets shows that the direct testimony of Mr. Abbott was begun on the eighteenth of ��� �
