The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1891-12-04
QUESTIONED WHITE.
The Defendant Spends Another
Day on the Stand.
Under Cross-E1amination he Makes Many
Admissions in Reference to Hcw He
specalatsd With CALI Money.

lie superior COult. W Heu ulS tIldI vas "
sumed at 10 o'clock yesterday morning, e.
g. Darwin, his attorney, said he desired 10
ask few more questions before he turned
over his client for cross-eXaminaton.
You were speaking about February u
1890. as n date of swelling was that after
YOU left the employ OF the Call Company p
asked MIR. Darwin.
81 continued there for five weeks longer"
"You speak of the forcing of February
18th as being by Mr.. Boyle as your sue
cessor; WAS that sop
NO. sir; il was done on March 18th by
Mr.. Boyle"
"Did you state that in your testimony
yesterday"
NO. ,iE."
I'VE object" said Assistant District At
torney Hmkle las it is wholly Incompetent.
We have no objection to what was done
from June 9. 1889, to February %, 1890
What accrued after that is immaterlal"
The objection" ruled Judge Trout, us
sustained The witness may, however, cor
rect any of his testimony"
Mr. Boyle Swore something about seeing
cash paid you every night Could he do
that ," asked Mr.. Darwin.
'.No, sir. he could not. he must have
been speaking of custom and habit rather
than sight He could not have seen it from
his desk on account OF the partitions"
RECEIPTS.
Defendants counsel said he would again
try to prove additional facts in reference 10
The Calls receipts. Mr.. Pickering had
testified that THE Calls receipts or rather
profits. are now $1,000 or $1,000 a month,
which inferred the difference was owing to
the absence of the defendant. He wanted
t. couiroyert this By showing that the in
crease in profits was due to economical ar
engagements.
These economical arrangements were
not maize during Whites management"
said Mr.. Hinkle. and a ripple of LAUGHTER
passed over the courtroom.
DO you know on what rest the en-
lsrged results of THE CALL?"
Yes"
Nj uinkle objected on the ground OF i'm
materaIity, and the objection was suS-
tanned.
MI Darwin said he was merely offering
to prove that the present arrangements
show difference in favor OF THE CALL of
$500 month on the paper account and
$50 a month in the Geographic service.
Sir. Hinkle again volunteered the iufOrma-
ton that all the economical arrangements
were made since White was business
manager.
what was the amount spent monthly for
paper during your management" asked
Nr. Darwin.
Another objection was interposed, as the
books would be the best evidence Of the
amount expended.
Do you know the average difference be-
tween bills now and formerly paid for tele-
graphic service p
No. I don't kn1w now. The books here
don't show it. cannot tell the exact con-
diuon of the paper account by reason of the
chaotic condition of the books. l have
statement Of the paper account during
kerr's time. As l said, there was no cash
balance for seven or eight years. | realized
that this was owing to my carelessness. and
was clvilly responsible. These books will
not disclose that ever appropriated dol
lar Of The CALLS money When the
Elamaut suit was commenced Kerr showed
ne an account of it and then | gave him that
statement generating him from any blame
III shortages that might exist in the office"
EXoNERATING KERR.
DO YOU know now you were right in
exoneTatng KERR
No; certainly l was not, according to
those books"
DO you remember any other CONVERSE
y
avoid criminal prOsecution?"
" Nj, Fitch said he felt sorry for me- and
my brother Robert ought give to me place.
Mr, Mast!ck made the remark that he
had
Nj. Hinkle objected. and that part of the
answer relating to what Mr. Mastick said
was ordered stricken out.
Mr.. Darwin said he wanted to SHOW that
another man in LIE CALL office had en-
bezzled money and the matter had been
.arFn- Il
amount taken. Darwin said he would men,
ton no names n connection with the affair.
Nj. HiDke objected to this and asked
that AT Darwln,s remarks be stricken
frem the record. The Court SO ordered.
MI. Darwin said his object was TO show
that the matter had been compromised and
criminal prosecution waived.
Dir. Ilnkle said the case before the court
was matter that could not be compro-
missed.
Judge Trout was of the opinion that
such testimony might be admitted if it were
q nIsdrmeanor embeZlement case.
Mr.. uinkle said the charge against White
was felony, as he had been charged with
embeZziing $50, COO
{" Now, then" continued Darwin, state
anything else that was said by those per-
sons who had power TO compromise the
matter"
THE DEED.
well. the next occasion was on Feb
ruary -, 1880, the day the deed from my
wife WAS printed as having gone on record
! went up in the mail-rOom with Mr..
CrOthers 10 work on books that had been
neglected for years. Mr.. Crothers said it
was mistake to have the record of the
deed printed. He said 1T was mistake be-
cause the deed should have been put in his
name and then the other papers would not
have got on to it. l also had a CONVERSE
tion with Mr.. Fitch, who said, well have
to take the risk. 1t might have been a
mistake"
What did Mr.. Crothers ever say to YOU
about being exempt from prosecution il
you would turn over your property"
In addition to what has been reported as
having transpired at our conversation on
February I'D Mr.. Pickering came in and
sand to me: You leave those books alone
We are going to have an expert 20 over
those books. How do | know YOU are not
going to tamper with them?' | asked Mr..
CrOthers what Mr.. Pickering meant, as
nothing was left but for them to put my
worthless carcass in prison. Mr.. Crothers
then said: Don't be afraid Of that, White.
We are more anxious to keep this matter
quiet than you are
Il object" said Mr.. Hinkle, "as this con-
versatiOn was after White had turned over
his property. ii the defendant will testify
under oath that there was an agreement not
to prosecute him we will not object, but he
goes on 10 relate differences that cannot be
refuted or combated."
Let the last answer be stricken out"
was Judge TTOutt'S ruling.
Mir. Darwin persisted that differences had
been made to compromise, but no direct
promise had been made in order to avoid
cUmpounding felony.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
The Court refused to pass upon the cues
ton as 10 whether or not an attempt was
made TO compromise the matter
Give all the circumstances. continual
Darwin, between yourself and The Call
Company prior to your turning over your
property"
An objection was sustained and the CUES
ton changed as follows:
otate all the circumstances that inspired
you to the belief that if you turned over
your property you would be exempted from
TINS was also objected to as being too
vague and the objection was again sns,
tained.
Let the witness state" said ,Judpe
Trout, what was said or done prior to
turning over his property to MIR. Fitch as
the representative of The Call Company in