Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-04-11

TESTIMONY N RKBUTTAL
AFTER the recess MI. 6. H B. White, cashier Of
the Metropolitan bank, was called by the proeecu.
uon as witness in rebuttal The witness was
questioned In relation to the interview at police
headquarters on the night OF the robbery, and de-
nied that Mr.. Thompson had, In his presence, pro-
posed to McDevltt TO 60 TO New York, and that Nc.
Oelt nad said that II would be useless FOR him to
60, As the professional thieves would not deal With
called to the stand and gave similar testimony.
Mr. Thompson said that such conversation had
Nously.
THE CASE Po1 fHR ocv1RHxNr CLOSED.
MI. Worthingten said that the case was an
closed; that the government would like 70 call
mus that inspired HScEneys sesnon sn0" Tue
inc court did not regard this q important and
the case was cloaed
ARGUING rHI QUESTIONS RAISED By rHH COURT
The argument OF the questions proposed by the
court Yesterday was then opened by District Astor-
ney Worth1nSton- The questions raised b. the
court were, substantially. whether tho defendant,
McDevtt,, couObe convicted Of receiving the stolen
property when there was no evidence that II ever
so convicted when the evidence Was that he re-
ceived the property Is agent OF the bank.
not new, As they had been considered In drawing
the Indictment The conclusion to which counsel
had come when the Indictment was drawn. and to
over the case, was that there was no Other chine
known to the law for which the defendants could be
convicted except that charged in the Indictment
"There is no proof here" said Mr. worthinSton,
"that either Of these defendants knew anything OF
this robbery before 1t occurred"
ION, II You give that up, you are right" said
1.-THE evidence tends to show" said Mr. Worth
ington, shat this bank robbery was suddenly con-
ceived There was, we assume, general under
standing about all roooeries, but not about this
Mr. Al
persons, acting In conusion, received the stolen
ROReS y was Joint reception q al
Judge Wylie said that in his remarks yesterday,
when he used the words manual reception" he
may have used too strong a word. What he meant
was sucn a possession as placed the property
within his actual control
Mr.. Worthington argued that under the pr1nci-
be convicted when the property had been received
oy nus confederate. In thus case he thought 1t o
question to go TO the jury whether AcDevitt was
You make out McDev1tt's guilt through Film
DER said the court "You had better establish
MIR. Worthlngton called attention to the test.
mony Ior tne government that McDevilt and Film
der had met the thieves and arranged with them as
10 now the property could be obtained.
TRIFLING DISCREPANCY.
Judge Wylie, In commenting upon the testimony,
said that there was no doubt that McDevitt had
never received any Of the property. He spoke also
OF the contradiction OF McDevitts testimony as to
the time when he told Mr.. Thompson that he could
not go to New York after the bonds, immater1al,
considering the excitement that then prevailed. II
would be monstrous thing to come TO the conclu-
sion that McDev1tt was perjuTng himself, or for a
july 10 CONVICT on account OF any such discrepancy
JUDGE wYL1E MoDlF1Es HIS RULING.
After further argument by Mr.. Worthington,
Judge Wyne said that he was willing TO instruct
the jury that they believed from the evidence in
the case that these defendants were acting In col
fusion with the thieves, and one OF them received
the property from the thieves for the protection Ct
the thieves OF for their own profit they could con-
vict.
Mr.. Wells suggested that II one OF these confed-
crates received the property, it the same; but
Judge Wyne did not accept that as q necessary
conclusion.
The district attorney suggested that as the hour
was late, perhaps the argument for the government
mad better be deferred until the morning.
Mr. woRTHINGToS NOT SURPRISED.
"For our part, your honor" said Mr.. Chrsty. 1--WE
are willing to submit the case without argument
under this charge"
The district attorney said in an aside, II am not
surprised"
MIR. Christy made some remarks about this COM
ment OF the district attorney, and the court, ad-
dressing the district attorney, said that he had un
statement OF the Law.
The district attorney said that he had no inten-
ton OF rejecting upon the &C lrt in any way.
ADJOURNED TILL TOMORROW
After further discussion it was decldDu to ad-
Journ until the morning. when two hours would be
allowed each side for the closing arguments
The court then adjourned
--