Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1879-08-15

CJncluirI from lir>t pag,.l
Monday FoTeuoon-. Session.

fence would rest.
Mr.. Roberts suggested that the case he
submitted without argument.
Mr.. Ballard declined the proposition.
Mr. Roberts then made the opening arsu-
mcnt for the prosecution. After rcciting the
statute under which the complaint was
brought. he said The respondent was in
1861 "a clerk of the Central Vermont rail
road company in thr freight depot in this
city. Mr.. Appleton was the principal ser
want here of the company. lie had the right
to supervise all the business to its ninutcst
details. But he had his own branch of the
business and he can not he held blameworthy
if he did not pay the sirictcst attention To
the details of business in the freight depart
mcnt In 1873 there were old hills uncollcct-
ed to the amount OF : 900 which the com
pany claimed of Mr. Appleton, and which he
in turn claimed of Mr. Paige. But there
is no evidence of any deficiency at
thi. time In 1876 there was new
branch OF business thrown upon the freight
lrpartmcnt-that known aS stOp-ovcr charges
and prepaid through freight This branch Of
business was thrown upon Mr. Paige more
particularly and he was supposed To he
responsible for it. There was Il very loose
system in force and No proper account of
these matters ;,as kept. But the company
was not responsible for this Nr. Paige was.
He is not here held responsible for loose
bookkeeping but only in 81 far as he has ap-
propriaicd money To his own usr. The de
/ t.s ft4a.a "a.
sources ascerlaned Mr. Paige ought To be
able To explain these matters. lie knew
that cars were coming here and that the
freight on them was collected. All the money
passed into his safe and if this money had
been transmitted To St Adams there would
have been no deficiency however the hnnks
were kept ar il nn books whatever had hrtn
kept. y responsibility is thrown upon Mr..
Paige prina iacc 'rhis. business was under
his principal charge Ii was his business to
know all the details of it. The money has
been shown into his hands; let the respond
cnt show what has become of it. He only
says the books were very loosely kept; it
was difficult to Keep track of things. What
did he do with the money collected? II
was put into the safe. What became of it
then? 1t was Mr.. Paigc's business to for
ward this money To st. Adams, and hr did not
do it. Mr.. Paige says he sent the money to
the E1prea5 office or the bank by Mr. Apple
ton or one If the rIofks. Very r,niI. All
hhjs money reached st. Adams all right;
hut aside from this there is SIG, 900 which
was never sent to ST. Adams.
Mr. Roberts then briefly reviewed the in
yestigalions of Mr.. Leard and Mr. Hatch
AMI coninued Th:drrit eXistsand doesn't
come simply from iuacmaIa backs. The
money has been taken, and We say that it rests
upon Mr. Paige TO show where it has gone
to- we produced bills here signed ''P, in
dicating Mr.. Paige; We find in the book in
his own handwriting minute Of the receipt
of TIM MONEY; hut that money washeper ssnt
to 81. Adams Mr.. Paige makes one state
mcnt which would convict him of cmheZ-
element on his own testimony and that is
that he collected so of the stop-uvcr charges
and, without reporting it. turned ii over To
Mr. ipllaloA. But Mr.. Appleton testified
that he HeyGr rccivrd thai money. If he
hal done 81, it would he III excuse l0r Dir.
Page.
No system of bookkeeping or hcl, of sys
tenn can account for this deficit. The
money is gone and some one has taken it. Ii
thu clerks haven't taken it Mr.. Paige has
The prosecution have no malevUlGnt icelin"
toward MIR. Paige nor desire 10 prosecute in
stead of prosecute him. This is all have To
say, in opening this case
WI BNIIAEns AEGUMENr Fox me Defence
II NIr. Paige wac charged with civil re-
sponshility in tiiS case that would be one
question hut the charge is one of criminal
responsibility an entirely different thing
y crime has gnl 10 be fastened upon the re-
spondcnt beyond any reasonable doubt. The
prosecution has had Two years TO ferret this
thing out and the presumption is that they
now have every item of evidence that can
convict the respondent of this crime The
court is then. to decide il there is reason
able probability on this evidence that a petit
jury would convict. If it is true that there
is a dcfalcation of $4,000. il is equally true
that the evidence has failed to disclose who |
is the guilty party The case is a strange
one. No explanation has been given Of |
where the money has gone to
We are entitled to a specification of what
ever item is depended upon To convict of en-
bezzlement. Authorities quoted at length |
Ii this is the law, here is an end of MIR. |
RObertss talk. No evidence shows how |
much money has been collected The evil |
dence only shows a deficiency in the bal |
ance of an account. Mr. Paige was Il mere
clerk. The duty of clerk is simply to do
rs his superior tells him To. He and his as
sociates in the office were clerks alike If |
instead of Mr.. Page. Mr.. Hendre had been
on trial it would he proved that he had arl
lhnrity to sign Mr.. Applcton's name. To col
lrct money and To put it in the safe Mr. |
Appleton and the clerks would swear that
they had taken no money and Won |
would have the same case against Mr. Hem |
dee rs against Mr.. Paige Can Won send |
Il man To States Prison on the same trsti
mony that would convict any one else Can
any particular money he pointed out that
MIR. Paige has omitted To send To- ST AlhanS
1t would he impossible for Mr. Paige to
have spent II 500 a month above his SALARY
without the fact being known To every one
in this community Every dcfallter We
read Of in the newspapers has done something
with his stolen money. 1t goes in spccul:l-
ton, gambling. fast horses or other WAYS.
But here is the respondent against whom NJ
such thing has been disclosed
Mr. Paige first became aware of the SIG
lUo deficiency IN September. 1871 II he
had been stealing $50 day for over wear
right before his principal, Mr. Appleton. and
he central office. why was il that it was
thirteen months before he heard of any def
,icncy: Then Mr.. Paige said he was as
oundcd. But what did he do2 Did he NV
No. lie gave the st. Adams investigators
Ill the help he could Mr. Hobart acquits
he respondent of all criminal responsibility
lie remained here, out of employment. for
nearly two Years before the arrest His con
luct and his declarations are inconsistent
With guilt on his part and are consistent with
his innocence
Mr. Ballard then at some length reviewed
hat part of the testimony which showed the
arsc responsibility of the clerks in the mat
or OF making reports, tic, AMI continued
'lr. Paige will not be- held responsible ON the
General statement that there is Il deficiency
II Sl6.OOO for which the prosecution hold
lin responsible.
About the $50 alluded To- 10y Mr. Roberts
{ was Mr. Paigc's desire and mine that no
act should he brought out ut this hearing
hat would implicate any one else When Il
lr. Paige WAS ON the witnrss-Stand asked
i'm nothing about this or put any similar ,
ucstions. The $50 Mr. Appleton asked Mr.
'aige Ia give him and Mr. Paige. Il
mere clerk, rs II matter ot course ohrycd the
rider of his superior. But Mr.. Appleton
enies taking this money. NIr. Ballard
hen considered ut length the matter of the
4 900 deficiency uf 1873 and the private Z
ccounts Kept by Mr. Paige aud Mr. Apple
N. The accounts conceded, except that
le 500 was ON Mr. PaiHc's book and moi on
lr. Applrlon's; andcounscl claimed that he. Il
moving where the >9O came from, did moi n
inter- it ON that account Mr. Ballard then ~
the -lj2 item. There was moth II
IL private about the memorandum of stop q,
Grr charges it was kept 10y MIR Paigc's :.
rrctl"n. 1t was only u part ot Il bose
stem. II Mr. Paige had DESTROYED this I,
cmorandum ur any of the books it would m
I'VE been testimony against him But he II
ii No such thing Mr. paigr's conduct is =,
,nsislcnt only with Sclf-cnnsCinlIs limo 4
nee. Not "!r word or one act has been "A
iuwn Ia prove his guilt. | don't believe II
at Mr. Appleton is guilty OF this dciaicI- Il
IN: hut he took that S?0 Tan the rrSpnn- !,
Mt he convicted on that item, when he al
I'll L.. L.. 4. l..