The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1878-09-20

| SldllnB lnaI cuDeZZlcnenL Is Il ldTCcDl
aggravated by a violation of trust" Thu
law as TO the conversion conveying tn
fact of intent is high law, but is intended
to cut of all legal quibbling and all ei
forts to defeat the ends of justice.
THURSDAY AFTERNOON.
| The court sustained the objection t
the question as TO Bancroff's intention Il
refund the money, on the ground that j
is competent only to show the intent o
i the crime. His honor cited authoritie
In support Of this position.
Bancroft's testimony continued: Ques
tion-State fully and every reason yol
had why, April 18th, 1877, you did no
include in the statement to Wright anC
CTichton all the amount of lands shown
in plat report. Witness gave reasons
LIST; A large amount of lands described
in plat were not sold at that time. End
A portion of the money received from
time to time in small amounts, had beer
deposited to my credit, together will
other monies; portion of it was refused
by the State Treasurer, it having beer
offered to him, and was retained by me
other portions of it had been used by me
and at that time was unable to replace
it. At that time my financial condi
tion-. Objection. Ruling by the
court that any statement as to his finan
cial condition or prospective ability wa.
incompetent. Counsel for defense offer
ed TO prove by defendants, and othel
competent testimony, that at the time
partial report was made to Wright and
| Crichton, he had debts due him TO the
amount of between two and three thou
sand dollars, which he expected to bt
Immediately paid, and that he had made
arrangements for loan upon his prop
erty of 81, 900 more, both which amounts
or as much thereof as necessary, he ex
pected TO at once turn over to the proper
authorities. Objected to as not proper
evidence, and objection sustained. Wit
ness said statement attached to plat re
port was a summary of all lands therein
sold; in those is included certain dis
puted State lands, section 6, Is, l, W, AND
section II, ID, W, 1880 acres. Stale
ment also includes lands sold after April
18th, 1877. Could not tell how many
acres without going over plats and foot
| ing II up. The two sections of State
lind sold after April 18th, 1877. Coun.
sci called attention to interview between
Wright and Bancroft, at the latter's of
| ficet Wright called at defendants re.
quest. Defendant could not state the
exact day, but his recollection varied
several days from DR.. Wright's; should
say at least a week earlier; not far from
middle of February, 1873. Delivered the
plat report at that time. Told Wright
the circumstances connected with the
matter, substantially as related by him
only little more fully. Had begun to
make these plats from accounts kept on
sheets of paper of sales and receipts in
December previous, working them up
as time would permit-intended to pre-
sent them to him as full, complete and
~ 10 TO-
sold. Wright asked defendant if he had
not already made full report; defend.
ant said he had not said so, but that
Wright might have inferred that, and
probably did. Went on to tell Wright
that in April preceding had every reason
TO believe and did believe that within
two or three months at farthest, should
be able 10 account for the entile amount.
Wright asked why defendant had not
placed money in State Treasurer's hands
from time to time? Replied that por-
ton of that time Sam Lappin was Treas
urer, and would not willingly place any
money in his hands, as he had already
defrauded him of So, 900 or So, 900. While
Hays was Treasurer he had declined to
received interest money. Also told him
that from time to time had informed some
members of the old board that a few
notice had ever been taken of it by board
all of which made him much more care.
less than he otherwise would have been.
Wisness stated further that he had been
disappointed in expectations had in the
spring; that it had been impossible to
sell property and collect debts. Ban.
croft then made statement of his financial
resources to Wright, asked him to have
II meeting of the board called. Was in
formed that'a special meeting would be
held soon, and defendant told Wright he
would be present and state to the board
just what he had stated to him. Inform
ed Wright that the matter could be ar.
ranged so that the institution would re
ceive as large an amount of interest as il
could in any other way, and the princi-
pal in two years. Did not know at that
time that Crichton was engaged in the
examination of Normal school lands
Bancroft then testified as to the interview
at which CrichtOn and Wright were both
present. Said he made substantially the
same statement as at conversation with
Wright, only less fully. Nothing was
said by Crichton at that time as to de.
handing money or papers. Crichton
! told defendant that he had been to Sa
lima and found that Major Burke had
been crooked, and wished him to look
over correspondence with him, and tee
what could be found, Went into pri-
vate office and examined files of letters
for perhaps half anhour. Crichton took
fourteen of Burke's letters; wanted to
take them to hotel to make some memo
randum; promised to return them, but
never has. On April 18th, 1877 defend
ant paid Wright all the money he had in
his possession belonging to the Normal
school; perhaps not TO dollar, but near
ly so. Went down to parlor of Mer
chants Hotel on the evening of March
2nd, 1873. Found but one or two mem
! bers of board present. Some one, prob
ably Murdoch, said they had not come
yet. Asked witness to come back in ar
hour. When he returned found board in
session, Murdoch presiding. Witness
here repeated Murdock's remark about
eliminating himsel, and stated his reply
| and substance of the, interview as befor(
given. Neither the Treasurer of the
or authorized by him, has ever made de
mand of witness for money. Could no
| tell what lands were embraced in money
paid to Wright and Criehton. Think Il
embraced lands sold last, prior to April
18th, 1877. Could determine exactly by
memorandum at his office. Court ad
journed to allow witness to find such
| data.)
In about an hour the case was resum
ed and Bancroft's testimony continued
Had searched for memorandum desired
but was unable to find it. Has made t
| Wright other payments of money
amounting to about $4,000, in addition
to the $500. Up to March 10, 1875
had received no money which had theI
on hand arising from the sale of Norma
school lands. Defendant said at tn,
time he used the several sums of money
named in plat report he never intended
to defraud the state of Kansas or tn,
state Normal school; always intended
to return the same. Has ever since, anC
does now intend to return them. Ha
done so as fast as he possibly could. All
] tempt was here made to introduce evi
dence as to defendants. financial. condi
ton and reasons for his failure to pa,
money. (Objected TO, objection sustain
ed.) Witness said Crichton never mad,
any demand upon him for money.
| CROSS EXAMINATION.
Had stated that he had sold lands, Il
Prof. Hoss, to II. G. Cross and. b,
thought, Prof Pomeroy. Only CONVEX
sation he recollected with Pomeroy wa,
on the side walk in front of postoffice
Could not fix the date, but knew it wa
soon after the organization of the boar
of regents. Prof. Pomeroy accosted hin
and said he had been continued as agent
Talked for perhaps ten minutes. H
asked defendants opinion as to the sal
of lands; asked if there was any demans
for lands. Defendant said there was