Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-03-28
THE THOMPSON CASE.

4
Some Near Testimony lnts'oduced-3H ED
deace Taken Yesterday.
In the Thompson trial Expert Willis was
called to the stand, and testified as to the
| droppings on the books, and continued his
testimony yesterday forenoon. On cross
| examination witness, in reply to a ques-
| ton as to the amount of moneys paid over
the counter, said that one item of $4,000
was paid over the counter into the firm by
Conger Brothers. There were other items
of the same character that he could not
| specify without referring to the books.
AS to the relative proportion of cash
paid out over the counter and taken
in over the counter by Thompson wit
| ness could not state. The defense here
| attempted to show that Mr.. Loveioy's pc
! cuniary necessities during the period of
Thompson's alleged populations were so
great that he would at no time allow the
cash to accumulate in Thempson's charge
to the extent claimed by the state. The
| question through which Mr.. Hart said that
he desired to prove the state of facts was
objected to as incompetent and the objec-
| ton sustained.
| firms lumber yard, was the next witness.
| His testimony varied in no essential par
| ticulars from that given on the first trial,
! it being a recital of his methods in making
sales and in his turning over of the pro-
ceeds of such sales to the defendant when
defendant left the Office all the accounts
| between witness and defendant were set
| tied. The accounts agreed.
hn %b0
in the former trial, witness testifying that
some of the warrants turned over were in
slips for money which he had paid out.
On the re direct examination witness
said nine-tenths of all the currency he re-
ceived from sales, he actually turned over
to defendant.
Witness knew of no one who had the
combination of the lock or safe exceps
Thompson. Did not think either Farn-
ham or Lovejoy knew the combination.
Never saw the key to the cash drawer in
Thompson's desk sticking in the lock-
Thompson carried the key in his pocket
Mr.. Lee, assistant cashier of the Henne-
pin County bank, was the next witness.
Q.-Between January 1, 1882, ard July
1, 1882, what business did you transact
with defendant?.
cution would show by the witness that de-
PENDANT kept an account at the Hennepin
| County bank in the name of George S.
Thurman, and that witness did not know
that Thurman and Thompson were ider-
tical until he saw defendant in court.
MIR. Hart objected unless the proseou-
ton would 60 into the matter fully. They
must not try to convict by mere insinua-
| Ia ~ Al. -
count drop with the bare answer to the
proposed question. Defendant kept
such an account and he is not ashamed of it.
The objection was overru!ed and witness
said that during the time mentioned wit
ness kept a fictitious account in the name
of George s. Thurman. Witness supposed
defendant to be Thurman. Witness iden-
titled deposit slips made and left defend
ant in favor of George S. Thurman.
I Cross-examined-Doy you know why de-
PENDANT kept his account in this way? Do
not know what representations he made.
1t was an active account. There was no
talk at the bank of the identity of Thomp-
son and Thurman until this case came up;
witness had been in the bank since 1874.
Capt. Berry, of the police force, sworn:
Mr.. Lovejoy never intinated to witness in
any way that he desired Thompson to for
felt his bail and run away. He never said
he wanted to fix up the matter so it would
not get before the public.
| Cross examined-When defendant was
in my charge do not remember that was
instructed not to allow any one to converse
| with him; Thompson did not want to see
any one; don't remember of telling him
i'when he was incarcerated that Lovejoy or
Farnham wanted to fix the thing up, can
not swear 1 did not tell him so, l said to
him that Lovejoy was there and wanted to
see him. The reason why Loyejoy did
rot finally see Thompson was. think, be-
| cause Lovejoy concluded he did not care
to see Lovejoy. Don't remember that de-
PENDANT told me to tell Lovejoy to go to
hell.
| MIR. Robinson, formerly a bookkeeper
for Farnham d Lovejoy, was the next wit
ness, and testified substantially as on the
! former trial.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
r. Il. Gardiner was the next witness. Nc
new points were brought out IL his testi
mony. On the cross-examinat1on he testi
fed that he had not looked for Thompson:
small book. Reed and some other boys
in the Office looked for it. They did no.
look in Loveioy's private drawer or ofice
for the book.
VIM. n. Reed, the detective, next tool
the stand and reiterated the evidences
heretofore given on his direct examination
as to Thompson's methods OF keeping