Los Angeles herald., 1891-04-10
THE ELLIS TRIAL.
THE EVIDENCE STRONG AGAINST
THE DIVINE.
The Accused Sits Like Bronze Statue.
Testimony Contradictory of State
ments He Has Made.

tion and falsehood, convened again
yesterday morning, says Wednesdays
San Francisco Examiner.
The accused divine entered the room
quietly and greeted several of the Pres
bytery calmly. Then he took his accus-
toned seat to the left of the moderator,
and sat like bronze statue, cold and
impenetrable, awaiting the opening OF
the session.
He, as usual, was armed with mass
of documents, and seemed fully pre-
pared to make legal defense.
Following the order laid down in the
Confession of Faith, or, as it is termed
at the trial, "the book" Moderator
Sample first charged the Presbytery as
judge and jury. 1t was discoy cred that
in the absence of witnesses the prosecu-
ton would be compelled to take up an
other charge than that under considera-
tion yesterday.
II object" was DIR. Ellis' prompt in
terruption. 81 don't think it is fair for
the prosecutor to jump from one charge
to another. Let us stick to the regular
order"
The judicatory decided that the prose-
cution might take up the new charge.
The defendant sat down and gently
stroked his thin iron-gray chin whisk-
ers.
Detective Harper of the regular police
was called. In accounting for the fact
that several bills were raised in his
statement presented to the Central
Presbyterian church, of moneys which
he CLAIMED to have expended, DR.. Ellis
had said that his papers had been stolen
.okx he, ha
fee. MIR. Harper testified that he ee-
turned them to DIR. Ellis. The latter,
lieved they were all there.
II did not say positively that they
were; did I?n asked DIR. Ellis.
''No, sir. I don't think you exam
ined them closely. You were anxious
about papers concerning some Los An
geles property"
j. B. Frazer, of the firm OF Frazer &
Keefe, painters, testified that but $3.50
of the original amount due, 1902. 80,
had been paid. The Central Presbyte-
rian church still owed $277.5O.
"Did you ever render bill to DIR.
Ellis, as pastor, for $l05S?" asked DR..
Kerr, the prosecutor.
''No, sir" replied the witness.
The statement submitted by DR.. Ellis
shows that he claimed and received
$1058 from the church for the painting.
The charge that DIR. Ellis had de-
scended to falsehood in having testified
in suit brought against him on note
for 500 by Thomas Magee that he had
Offer ed the money to short, stout dark
person in Mr.. Magee's office, and that
it had been refused, was taken up.
The two clerks in Mr.. Magee's office
were called and swore positively that
DR.. Ellis had never offered either of
them the money, and that q judgment
had been recovered against him. One
of these gentlemen, George Van Dyke,
was taken in hand by DIR. Ellis. He
was short, stout, florid person, with O
light brown moustache. To prove that
he was the man to whom he had offered
the money DR.. Ellis asked that the
piano be pulled out into the middle of
the room. This was done amidst much
laughter from the judicatory. DIR. Ellis
remained as cold as an iceberg.
He placed Mr.. Van Dyke behind the
piano, questioned him as to the height
of the counter in and the general sur
roundings of Thomas Magee's Office.
''Now put on your hat, sir" he said.
The witness complied.
II ask" said DIR. Ellis, "if this per-
son might not readily be taken for
short, stout, dark man in the half light
of an office? 2"
Before leaving the stand the witness
testified that if the money had been Of
fered him by the minister he would
have accepted it.
After this recess was taken.
In the afternoon Hugh Frazer, the
treasurer OF the Central Presbyterian
church, was recalled and gave some
very damaging testimony against the ac-
cused pastor, who listened with an inn
passive countenance. He testified that
DR.. Ellis had misappropriated $593.51
of the church funds. After the minister
had submitted his statement, showing
the expenditure of $4371, and it had
been approved by the board of trustees,
the witness had been notified that bill
had been presented by the person who
had contracted for and supplied the
stained glass for the church. Under
instructions this contractor, T. G. But
terworth,-. brought in bill'of $305. .25
and stated that it was balance still
due for the work. DIR. Ellis had re-
turned the entire bill as paid.
w utL MT. ITdZcT CdlleQ CnlS
matter to the attention OF
the minister that gentleman seemed
worried. Then Mr.. Frazer said that he
would pay the bill and charge it in the
PASTORS personal account if he could not
meet it. DIR. Ellis accepted the PROPOSE
tion, and Mr.. Frazer paid the balance
due.
"Why did you pay that? Were your
suspicious not aroused then?"
mo, not at that particular time.
Shortly after, though, began to think
there might be other bills that had not
been paid. I suggested to Prof, Huf-
schmidt that we make an investigation.
We did 80, and found that balance of
$277.50 was still due Frazer & Keefe for
painting the church, $2l0 to w. w. Mon
tague & Co. for furnace, $75 to Gray
Brothers for new pavement, and other
small bills amounting to $3.50.
l was fairly astonished to find such
a condition of affairs" continued Mr..
Frazer, getting red in the face. II
could not believe that our pastor was
such a man as the investigation re-
vealed him to be. Only short time
before he had presented us statement
showing everything paid and received a
settlement in full, and now we were
confronted by the evidence that he owed
over $7OO.''
The witness informed the trustees of
the condition of affairs and Dr Ellis