The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1861-01-11

some three months 1t is alleged that no account
as given of these sums Of money If added they make
turn, was to be paid in May, 1860 We shall show that
r. Whitney, like most lawyers, is not much of
other the custody and management of his financial y
fairs. That he placed the notes with his brothers firm
erely for safe keeping, in their iron chest That they
endorsed by him until shortly before ma
rty when he endorsed them and got his brother put
in the Western Bank for collection and the money
aid on them in May, 1860, before stated.
These amounts are reurnabe to the Treasury Depart
en for the year 1s6o-and not before We shall prove
lat after this return Mr.. Whitney went to Annapolis
nd remained there for whole week, soliciting an exam
auon of his financial transactions. He obtained
lie service of member to ask the House instruct the
'mmittee to examine and report upon his accounts and
Though committee was appointed, your Honor will
re on page of the journal Mr.. Whitney's appeals
them failed get the investigation Had such an in
ury been undertaken these could have then
ectfed and the pain and modification of an indictment
nd trial. result as it may not have fallen npon his head
The defence then adduced the following testmo-
": Joseph Cushing, sworn.-Am a member of the
rm Of Whitney Cushing; know of no entry upon
he books of the firm, in relation to two notes of the
ity except the entries in the collection book and
'ank book of the Western Bank; have no other
Keeps a bill book; have not looked into it; do not
Keep the cash account. Mr.. May wan.
ed the bill book, and it was sent for
Joseph Whitney, sworn-Am brother of Mr.. Milton
Whitney, and member of the firm of Whitney d
Jushing two promssory notes of the city were
handed to witness by traverser for safe keeping;
hey were put in possession of witness and not of
The firm at all; the traverser handed them to wit
ness and asked him to collect them for him; kept
them for three four months, and when
the time came for collection, took tlSm |
out of the safe and they not |
endorsed; sent for him and be endorsed them;
then deposited them in the Western Bank for col |
lection; when paid they entered to the credit
of Milton Whitney on witness private cash |
book; both deposited Goth Of April, 1860, one
was paid on the Sth May, 1860, and the other on
13th-cash book of witness produced and entries
shown entry on Sth Nav, other on 18th; Mr.
Whitney did not receive dollar of the amount Of
those notes until they were paid in the Western
Bank; witness knows of his brother being at
Annapolis: after the order of the House
passed witness went down three days
after, and remained two or three days; oc-
casion saw him talking with a gentleman in the
lobby of the house, who was introduced to him as
Mr.. Maxwell; afterwards Mr.. Maxwell go into
the house, and converse with gentleman, Mr..
Burgess. MIR. Whyte-He was Chairman of the
Committee appointed on Mr.. Whitney accounts?-
Witness-T believe so."--Mr. Whyte then read
from page $50 of Journal of House, showing that Mr.
Burgess was the Chairman of said Committee
BY the State Whitney Gushing had nothing to
do with the notes; they were endorsed by the firm,
because witness had no account personally with the
bank; did not make memorandum of the time the
notes were handed to witness, when received them;
just put them into the safe, and in three months
so, thinking it was about time for collection, he
took them out, had them endorsed and placed for
collection; the notes must have been handed to him
about the same day his brother received them;
Milton does not keep bank account; Whitney and
Thomas kept bank account.-By defense-Bro-
Their deposited money as well as notes with witness
by State-Witness saw his brother talking to
Mr.. Maxwell in the lobby, he inquiring an ex-
animation into his accounts.-Mr. May here OBJ
ected to the witness giving such testimony
The defence contended it was admissible, that af-
ter the report, Mr.. Whitney went to Annapolis and
urged investigation into his accounts; they ask
cd it TO be admitted on the ground that no man
making false report, would have gone to the
House, soliciting and requiring investigation, if
he had known it to be fase.-Mr May said the
acts and declarations of the traverser could not be
admitted as evidence, after the report was made
and he had been mpeached.-Mr. Pitts said, the
traverser had not been impeached at that time if
he had been impeached they had no right to call
on him for reports before any prosecution, there
fore, was commenced, the acts and declarations of
the traverser were admissabe.-Mr May argued
on the other side, when the Court said, that it
was almost daily in the Court to admit
evidence of the acts of party before any charge
or criminal proceedings instituted as in the
case of one, who having purchased stolen goods,
and exposed them at the door of his store for sale
it was evidence going to show, that if fraud had
been committed, be was not cognzaut of it, but
that he was innocent of having committed any -
Witness continued-Brother was urging Mr.. Max
well tn see Mr.. Burgess. and ask him to push the
investigation; Maxwell vent into the House
to Burgess and then came back and
said that it would be attended to.-By State
Don't know the exact words said to Maxwell; from
the conversation the impression was that he was
urging an investigation into the report; do not
know whether any papers were carried to AnnapO-
lis and shown to Mr.. Maxwe-Here the bill
book of Messrs. Whitney & Cushing was brought
into Court and examined by Mr.. May There was
entry in it of the two notes of the city-The
witness also examined the book, and in reply to
Mr.. May said-That is the only bill book of the
Hrm; there is DO entry in regard to the two notes
upon it.--Mr. Joseph Cushing recalled by State
pf tlo
firm; 1t runs from the year 1855 up to
the present time; if the notes had been
assigned to the firm, they would have been entered
in this book; have examined the book and there is
no such entry.-John A. Thompson, Register,
called by the defence-Remember Mr. Whitney
coming to the Registers office and nuuiring for the
books of the Criminal Court.-Mr. May asked if
if this evidence came within the ruling of the
Court.-The Court said the defence wanted to
show the sources from which Mr.. Whitney got his
information, which he put in his report MIR.
Pitts said they offered it to show the good faith in
which Mr.. Whitney acted in preparing his re-
ought to be allowed to show the fact
where he got bis information. --Before
Mr.. Thompson proceeded, Mr.. May wanted
to know if he could fix the date as to the time re-
ferred to, when Mr.. Whitney visited the office Of
the Register.-Mr. Thompson said he could re-
member when the interview took place.-Mr
May then objected to the testimony. The defence
should show the time of the interview, whether it
was prior or subsequent to the report.-Mr. Pitts
said they could examine the witness in any way they
pleased, at the beginning the end, if they did
not follow the testimony up, to show the time
of the interview, then it could go for what it was
worth.-The examination was then continued by
consent of Court.--Mr. Thompson proceeded
Recollect the fact of Mr. Whitney calling and ask
ing for the books of the Criminal Court which were
furnished him; he then asked for piece of paper
and that was given him; was busy at the time and
deputy waited on him; cannot say at what period
II here had haan oil
Whitney for a report, by seeing it in the papers;
cannot say whether be in the office about that
time or not; witness cast his eve over to-
wards Whitney and saw him figuring with
a pen or pencil on piece of paper; impress
sion is that he called at the office more than
once; recoect distinctly that the last time he call
ed he asked for books and paper.-Mr. Nav
wanted to know if the Court considered this test-
mony as in or out He thought by ruling it was
out. They had not shown it was posterior to the
call of the Court.-Mr. Pitts thought it was GER
tainly before the Court; no matter whether they
proved that the visit was subsequent to the call nv
this witness, they had done so by Mr.. Jos. Whit
ney.-The Court thought they could not be con-
fined to a single witness, the testimony was now in
for what it was worthwhile. May thought
the defence must follow up the testimony
Thomas Ireland sworn.-Am sheriff of Anne
Arundel county; remember seeing Milton Whit
ney at Annapolis, during the last session of the
Legislature; he came to witness and asked him if he
knew Mr.. Denis, a member of the House; said
ney told Denis that he wanted him to present
some papers, and ask an investigation; Mr.. Denis
promised to do so; in the House when
Mr. Denis called attention of the House to
the subject; Mr.. Whitney exhibited papers at
the time don't know what they were.--By State
Mr.. Whitney said he had a statement CT his
account which he wanted to leave with Mr. Denis.
and desired that the Legislature should proceed to
investigate that account; was in the House when
Mr.. Denis got up and asked that a committee
might be appointed to investigate this matter
by defence-Don't recollect now whether Mr. Den
is asked for a committee to be appointed, or that
the committee already appointed be requested to
investigate the report.--John l.. Thomas sworn
-Recoliect Mr.. Whitney going to Annapolis dur
ing the session of last Legislature after
the order passed and Mr. Whit
ney had collected the material to furnish his
report, he placed it in my hands to take down to
Annapolis; went down in the afternoon train; went
to the House and was not in session; waited there
and placed them in the hands of Mr.. Kidd; went
into the House next morning, when they were read;
it was about the last week of the session when wit
ness went to Annapolis; Mr.. Whitney came down
day or two afterwards went with him to Max
wells room; could not find him; waited until next
morning, when Mr.. Whitney saw him; Mr. Whitney
went to see Mr.. Denis and desired him to push the
matter OF his accounts for investigation before the
House, and wished Mr.. Denis to defend him in
case any attack made on his character he
told Mr. Denis he challenged an investigation into
his accounts: saw Mr.. Whitney evening in the
yard of the City hotel in conversation with Mr.
Burgess, Chairman of the Committee); he went to
see Mr.. Gordon and Mr. Burgess, and also Mr. Frean-
er, and urged them to an investigation, Mr. W, left
Annapolis on the morning of the last day of the
session, and witness left in the evening; witness
was also present in the House when Mr. Denis made
his remarks in allusion to Mr.. Whitney. These re-