Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1889-10-23
BAfWELL'S BOOKS.
THEY CREATE NO LITTLE INTEREST IN
THE COURTROOM.
His Unique System of Accounts-A Pre-
sentiment that All Sings Hops
Would be Burned.

Court yesterday the case OF BagWell VS..
All Sing was taken up, and A. G.
Wagner was called to the stand by Mr..
Brusie. Witness said he took mortgage
on All Sings hop crop. The mortgage did not
embrace any other person than All Sing,
but there were verbal agreements. He did
not like to trust the money to All Sing, and
it was agreed between witness, Mr.. Pickett,
All Sing and Bagwell that the latter should
handle the money. He could not say pos
itively that the agreement was acceptable
to All Sing. The first money drawn by
Bagwell was 5000, and the next sum $500.
All Sing was present and received the
money. In September $3.50 was drawn.
Prior to the latter draft witness paid bill
for All Sing from Hayes, the plumber. He
could not now find it.
The Court-"Well, Mr.. Wagner, you
must find that bill. There has been con-
siderable controversy over it, and want ii
produced in Court"
The witness said he would again try to
find it.
Witness said he took receipts for the
various sums paid out, and the Court said
they must be produced.
Witness SAID that some were duplicates,
and the Court said that duplicates would
not answer; the witness must produce the
originals.
The original mortgage was then offered
in evidence by Mr.. Brusie. 1t was for the
sum of 81 400, secured by a crop of hops
then growing, and belonging to All Sing.
The interest, or compensation, mentioned
in the instrument was one cent for each
pound of hops grown by All Sing. The
mortgage was of the iron clad order, and
was drawn by Mr.. Pickett.
Mr.. Brusie read from a statement OF
moneys alleged to have been drawn or paid
out for All Sing, prepared by the witness,
and askei for the vouchers for the several
sums.
The witness explain ed the nature of the
demands, for some of which he said he had
receipts, and some he had not. There re-
manned balance due him from All Sing OF
something over 5000.
The mortgage calling for s.. 400 witness
explained that 81 900 was inserted in the
ACCOMPANYING note in order to cover an
alleged Indebtedness by All Sing to Bag
we'll The terms of the note and mortgage
had been explained to All Sing.
To attorney White witness said that Ah
Sing had made some objections to the cor
rectness of Bagweifs statement of moneys
received.
After the hops had been burned All Sing
came to witness and went over the ac-
counts. He objected to the Hayes bill for
pipe, etc., saying he thought it was toe
high.
Mr.. Brusie-"Did you believe that Bag.
well was properly applying the money
drawn by him to All Sings benefit?"
Witness-"I did"
Mr.. Brusie-"Did you not tell me in
your office that you believed Bagwell was
using the money for his own benefit and
that All Sing was being defrauded ?"
Witness-"I did, it was later on, and
had arrived at such a conclusion"
Mr. Brusie-"Did you not say you would
do what you could to punish a man who
would do that kind of business ?"
Witness-"I did,"
The Court-"Mr. Wagner, when this
$1,000 was inserted in the crop mortgage
for the benefit of Bagwell, did you under.
stand that Bagwell claimed that All Sing
then owed him $1,000?"
Witness-"Yes, sir"
Mr.. Brusie next called J. NJ. Jackson
who was a member of the firm of Hayes &
Jackson. He remembered Bagwell order
ing some milk pans The charge there.
for was included in the bill for pipe
charged to All Sings account, by direction
of Bagwell.
AT this juncture of the proceedings Mr..
Bagwell himself arrived and at once took
the witness-stand He brought an account
book with him, and was told to explain its
entries. His first charge against All Sing
was in January, 1889, for sixty-two days
horse-hire. Witness said he had no mem
orandums for the charges, rs he kept the
items in his head. All Sing used foul
horses daily. He did not make his entry
until the close of the month.
Mr.. Brusie here asked the witness where
he got the account book, and he replied il
Sacramento. He was pressed to tell wher
and at what store he bought it, but coulC
not. He did not know whether it was or
Front, or Tenth street-in short, ht
had no idea where ne got it.
Continuing, witness said that in Febru
airy All Sing used sixty horses, or two
horses day. Witness kept the number il
his head and made up the charge at the enc
of each month. He was absent very littl'
from the ranch while the Cinnamon wer,
there. On days when witness was away
his wife informed him of the number o
horses used by All Sing. He would keel
these figures in his head until the end o
the month and then set them down.
Witness was asked by the Court If he haC
ever before used and bought such an &C
count book as the one in evidence, and b.
replied that he had not.
He was then asked how he could hav
purchased such book and not remembe
when or where he got it. He said b.
thought he must have had it as early a
July, and his impression was that it va
bought earlier in the year than that.
Judge Van Fleet then asked witness hov
it was that the charges against All SIM
were entered at the end of each month
that entries were made fer January, ant
that he could not say in what part of tn
year he got the book.
Witness replied that be had kept som
of the items on slips of paper.
The Court then recalled TO witness tn
fact that he (Bagwel) was a farmer, ant
asked how ii happened that the book coul,
have been kept so spotless for nealy year
when as q rule farmers hands are more o
less soiled after their work.
This was something of a puzzler to tn
witness, but he was inspired by the happ.
thought that perhaps he was in the hsbi
of washing his hands before using tn
book.
Mr.. Brusie then took the witness alon
over the All Sing accounts in the book
item by item, and had him explain them i
his way. These explanations were abou
as vague as others that the witness had al
tempted Witness said each month
charges we've for that particular month
There was an item in the July account fo
meals for carpenters who worked on tn
hop-house. The hop-house was reall
built in June
Then followed various charges agains
All Sing for moneys paid him, for whic
the witness had taken no receipts. II
paid the carpenters wages for All Sing, bu
made no entry thereof.
There was one charge for nails in th
August accounts, which witness said wer
used in the construction of the hop-houst
The charge was made at about the time th
nails were used.
WITNESS did not explain how nal
bought in August were used in the cor
struction of building erected in June.]
After wrestling for while longer wit
the witness memory and his accounts, Nj
Brusie turned them both over to the oth'
side.
To attorney White witness said b
thought he had explained the entries
the book to Mr.. Pickett before going ava
in September.
Judge Van Flest-''It was just the ds
before the hops were burned, was it not
Il. i -