, 1874-01-16
THE GAGE MATTER.
Possible Line Of Defense by
His Counsel.
1t VIII Probably DC Claimed that
Neither Indictment Will
Hold Water.

Az WAS stated yesterday in this paper, tho
Gage mnttor has boon postponed I'LL tho 23a,
wls n ho will bo required to plead to tho indict-
meuts found against him.
Thcro Ia little doubt bnt that whom tho proper
time couees Ills counsel will make motion to
quAsn THE INDICTMENT
for failing to turn over tho money, not on tho
ground Of any technical flaws. but Tor Sub.
etautlal roasons. Tho law on which this indiot-
mont Is baBcd la AZ foliown: 10
THE sTArE Law.
, II my cgacer of person WHO now ID, or hereafter
may be, intruhted to collect, dsburse, receive or
eafely keep my tnonoy Or nnnoys. revenue O. re'o
Ills sate 70 liz school fund Of any county Or town
shp. 10 any county tn thia sase 70 any canal tMr
, ss'9ax u ny y for he W
bordeuns on or within oil state p f sny otner iana
bubble purnoscs, and who nha fall OF rof,iso to pay
over ali moneys. warrnnts, bills. notes. and ostera
burscmcnt, and Ina mot lisnurscd. or collect or
.h, receive Ct 'ss receive for conf sfeksp
sstanspg op o % eny ac n :. cos xen a
officer or person shall be thereto required by law, and
aeand duly made By tho SUCCESSOR or auccesaora Of
bch olCsr or person to whom auch mouoya warrants
bills, notes. orders ought to DO paid over Or to h!s
q sr y tn w.t
liz; s;tp eresy W saeh oeef Or psrson aa conviction
thereef be runiahcA ~ confinement IN tue peniten-
ry term n L. ha tn nc ne5 ss
committed to the pcnontiary uner Tits aoct!o IN.
less the money not paid oyor ehnll nn9u1t to tloo
Riolei by unavoidable 1osa or accident Eycry per-
Convicted ,,nler tho provisions Of Tits section
nhn,i forever thereafter DO Ineligible and dsqualAea
stato.
THE FIRST oD1EoT1oN.
It maY bo maintained by 6fr. Gage'a council,
in tho first place tlat this iaw docs not apply to
his caso, .or TINT Of any city officer, slnco it waB
passed in 1876. whlo tho City Oharter,. which de-
fines tho dutes Of city officers, was adoptod, In
specifics .porHous who hold nonoys belonging to
tho StAte, any county, or any canal, school, rail-
roat OF other fund, but avoids mentioning city
officers in any manncr whatevor. Itcan therefore
this law than the Cashier Of a banl would be,
and that tho Corporation Of Chicago has it's rom,
edy agaiuHt 1fr. Gago in nh action Of debt, pro-
tisoly as my private corporation would In case
one of lts officers had defaulsed.
THE SECOND OBJECTION.
II may noxt be alleged that while he is in
dicsod for failing to turn over under tho low, llo
has IN fact turned over tho monoy, slnco he
signed q, ,aetticnont with tho city, By which ho
his Liabilities. Tho transfer WAS a fornnl one,
accepted by the city officials. aud approved by
the Mayor, Corporation Counsel, Comptroller,
and Finance Committee,
THE INDICTMENT FOR Perjury.
So far as the indictment for perjury is con-
cerned, It may bo set up that AIr. Gago took an
oath net required by law, which, nccording to all
tho decisions, does not constitute perjury, evou
II nntruo, Il statement which Is cosrcct, hnd
which waa fully explained in The TRIBUNE
somo dnyg ngo.
HE HAD THE MONEY.
It may further bo alleged that, even II the oath
taken by him had been tho QUO required by law,
tho indictment would not hold. Tito intict.
ment sets forth that he sworo thero was
81, 1888, 900 in tho Treasury, when thoro was III
reality but 5000, 900. His counsel may clainrthat
he would Laye been guilty OF perjury had lo
eworn there was but 3Go0,000 in tho Treasury,
since the money WAS in reality in tho Treasury,
was loaned by him., to banks or Individuals, was
actually IN the Treasury just as much go as tho
sum which might happen to DO in tho vaults.
uhefoiQf6, W1len DG EN0fe tlat 10 n4u mullC0