St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-08-03
RAkED FORE AND AFT.
The Shotwell-C lerihew Case
Has an Airing Before
Judge Mahoney.
E. M. Wilson Argues Strongly
for the Release Of the
Accused,
While Judge Shaw Rakes
Them With Double Grape
and Canister. fa
The Poor Devil and Rich Mer-
chant Are One to
the Law.

| tators, nearly all more or less dlrectly
interested in the case. Eugene Wilson,
for the defense, opened the argument.
He first took up the testimony of Mr..
Shotwell in regard to going east to raise
money! Everything was perfectly regu-
lar, as Mr.. Shotwen had the promise OF
plenty of money, and fully expected to
| get it and have money enough to meet
| the drafts when they came on. MI.
Shotwell and Mr.. Clerihew could have
had no object in defraudiDg the bank, as
| the money did not go into their pocketS,
but was paid out to creditors. If these
| methods were irregular nearly every
| banker in the Northwest could be prose-
cuted, as everyone did the same thing.
Mr.. Wilson referred at some length to
| the schedule of assets and liabilities, and
accounted for the discrepancy in the
assets by the fact that in the state
ment the property had been estimated
at the invoice price, whereas the as
| signee was obliged to make schedule
| based upon the price the goods would
| sell for at an aSSignee's sale, where the
| price would necessarily be smaller than
at a regular store sale. Mr.. Wilson
argued that the firm had not drawn the
| money; that in depositing the checks
| with the bank they had simply made a
contract whereby the bank should pay
the money for them. He closed with a
brief plea for the discharge of the pris-
| Oner.
Judge Shaw followed in his charac-
teriStic style. The firm of Shotwell,
Clerihew q Lothman had, he argued,
deceived the bank by the check, and
induced the cashier to pay out money
on it. In making out this check MIR.
Sbnfwpll was inst a puilty Mr. (IRrI-
hew, because he knew what was going
on, and connived at defrauding the
bank. Judge Shaw next passed to the
question, Did Mr.. Shotwell and Mr..
CleriheW draw the check with criminal
intent? He held that they did, and re-
viewed much of the testimony to prove
that such was the case. At noon the
court took recess.
HE KEEPS IT UP.
1t was 2:30 when Judge Shaw, re-
sumed his argument. He began by
reading from the Minnesota Reports,
and cited various cases similer to that of
Shotwell, Clerihew & Lehman. The
law presumed that all men intented
their voluntary acts. The question now
comes to this-Is the testimony suffi-
cient to repel the presumption of guilty
intent? We hold that the defendants
have produced no such evidence, and
all their efforts to eXtricate themselves,
sink them still deeper into the mire.
Mr.. Clerihew can not plead that he was
drawn into this thing by MIR. Shotwell,
for that does not hold in the eyes of the
law. Because he was implicated jim
criminal act performed by another, it
does not release him from the RESPONSE
bility attaching to the crime. Mr.. Wilson
attempts to clear Mr.. CleriheW through
Mr.. ShOtwel'S monumental gall, but it
will not do. 1t is shown by Mr.. CIeri-
hew's own testimony that the only hope
he had of those checks being paid,
was that Mr.. Shotwell might be
able to borrow money in New York.
How long would it take judge to come
to conclusion if these persons were
poor devils, charged with obtaining S25
instead of $4,000? Not long, warrant
you. But Mr.. Shotwell and Mr., Cleri-
hew come into this court room clothed
in the eyes of the law precisely the
same as the man who is charged with
stealing S25. There is no reason why
their crime should be dwelt lightly
upon, and do not think that in this
case it will be. In this case even if the
drawer of the check had a reasonable
belief that there would be money on
hand to pay it it does not relieve HIM
from criminal intent. Judge Shaw
compared Mr.. Clerihew to Judas Isca-
riot, who sold his Lord for thirty pieces
of silver, hoping that his captors would
not kill him. But, continued Judge
Shaw, Judas has decencY enough to
return the money and then
GO AND HANG HIMSELF.
The defense has laid considerable
stress on the fact that Messrs. Shotwell
and Cherihew did not profit by the
transaction-they used the money in
Gni,. 1nlN pt1tf L, &c. ~
question. The question is how they got
the money, not what they did with it.
There is probably hole somewhere.
and Mr.. Wilson the attorney for the as
Signee of the defunct firm, might tell
where it is. 1t is clearly shown by all
the testimony introduced, that just be-
fore ShOtwell went to New York he and
Mr.. Cherihew entered into an agree
ment to violate the law, and then they
trusted i'll Providence to avoid the con-
sequences. They agreed to draw checks
on bank where they. had no money.
Nowif Mr.. Shotwell had been lucky
enough to borrow money when he went
to New York, nothing would ever have
been heard of this matter. These men
drew some $4,000 from the Nicollet
National bank, knowing that they had
not dollar in New York to make good
the amount. Mr.. Cherihew. if he knew
anything, knew this was theft Here
Judge Shaw took up something Mr..
Wilson had at the examination, and re-
marked that it was something like the
flowers that bloom i'll the spring-it had
nothing to do with the case
Judge Shaw here took up the testi
mony of Mr.. Shotwell and Mr.. Cleri-
hew and tore it all to pieces. especially
that portion which referred to the Civ
ing of a statement of the firms financial
condition to some commercial agency.
The attorney gently insinuated that the
statements of the assets of the firm had
been Intentionally misrepresented: that
the firm knew the statement was false.
or else that some $500, 900 or $500. 900 had
gone into the pockets of the members of
the firm. The reckless swearing by the
two defendants would seem to indicate
that there was a deliberate scheme TO
Cefraud fixed up by the defendants.
The famous telegram was next taken
up and diSsected in very lively man
| ner. 1t had different meaning from
that which showed on it's face. continued
the attorney. 1t meant that the machine
concOcted before ShOtwell left for New
York was working all right, as some
sucker had been found in the East who
this wonderful telegram Mr.. Clerihew
justifies himself in drawing these checks
on the Nicollet bank. Why, this tele-
gram was sent by Mr.. Shotwell before
he ever went into the Providence bank
or had made any arrangement for get
| ting any money.
ask you. has Mr.. Clerihew right to
rob the Nicollet bank of SSO,OUO upon
the assurance of his partner that every
thing is all right? IT such a justifica-
| ton is to prevail this statute becomes
| dead letter on our statute books, and
a decision in favor of the defendants by
your honor would be to