The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-09-12

It was dee to Mr. Morrison to make just that
much of disclosure to him. Mr.. Lynch was
the national bank examiner of the State. 1t
would have been out of keeping and quite inn
proper for Mr.. Lynch, as bank examiner. to have
disclosed to outsiders the position or condition
Of any national bank, but here was a man. o
trusted friend of his, who was about to negotiate
for the purchase OF controlling interest IN this
bank.
Mr.. CLAYPooL-Why you say that Mr.. Lynch
did disclose the condition of this bank by telling
him about the Slaughter steal
Mr.. BUTLER-I do not say any such thing.
Mr. CLAYPooL-That is what Mr.. Lynch tes-
titled to.
Mr. BUTLER-No, sir That is not what
he testified to. Mr.. Lynch did testify that he
felt that there was that much due Mr.. Morrison
and he told him simply this. that at his last ex-
animation he found that Slaughter was short in
MS cash; that he found there was something
wrong with the 5 per cent. redemption fund,
and that he found il the bank some notes from
Carey Miller, the late teller, that might require
Observation-Disclosures are about the words of Mr.
Lynch's testimony. L do-not recollect the exact
words, but my statement is correct in substance.
He further testified that he felt that TO disclose
that much was due Mr.. Morrison In order that
he might investigate for himself, but that he
did not go into general explanation, or any full
statement of the matter. Plaintiffs counsel saw
it is necessary TO have this jury find he has lied
abo ut it. Did he so tell Morrison. or mott If he
has not perjured himself, he did. Plaintiffs
counsel say that John L. Ketcham and Davis
swore that Lynch told them the bank was sound
at his house that night when Mr. Davis went
there, as his cousin, and thinking that, On &C
count of his relationship, he would find out
something from him. Mr.. Lynch swears that
they did to his house, but that he
did not tell them anything about the condition
Of the bank; that he told them that was matter
for them to investigate; that he disclosed moth
ing to them at all, but told them if they were
about to buy into the First National Bank it was
big undertaking, and it was for them to inves-
tigate. They say he told them that the bank
was sound, and all right. This is the only con-
hict there is to Mr. Lynch's evidence. 1t does
not prove or tend to prove, whether or not he
told Mr.. Morrison, prior TO the commencement of
the negotiations, what he has testified that he
did tell him regarding Slaughter and Miller
matters. Who is A. d. Lynch? He is a man who
has twice been called to important trusts by the
government Of the United States He has an
honored father, man of many years, and man
out this community. and you know
that that father has son who
stands in reputation for integrity, honesty, NOR
atty and high character, the peer of any citizen
OF the State of Indiana. Shall his reputation be
whis.ed away by the breath of Mr.. Shepard
who delights to tell juries ribad jokes, and stale
anecdotes coupled with profanity Or shall his
character be blasted by groundless and utterly
improved charges, asserted by counsel who claim
high standing for honor and integrityg But
plaintiffs counsel know that their case is gone
unless they can induce you to find that Lynch
is perjurer; that McCutcheon is ''perjurer"
and ''felon:" that Holiday and Bates have testi-
fed incorrectly; that English is totally unworthy
of belief. and that John G. New and John c.
Wright have covered themselves with perjury.
There are seven witnesses, as good and reputable