The Yellowstone journal. [volume] (Miles City, Mont.) 1893-1901, 1893-11-01

through the records OF the Stock Grow
ers National bank. which show that it
was paid on Oct. %. 1892. The note it.
self remains u%ncancelled in my posses
sion as receiver. ] have also traced the
note, No. 1857 through the records. and
find no such note signed by Andrew +.
Burleigh. There is a copy Of that note.
There is no record OF the payment Of
note No. 1857. In a general way | am
acquainted with the handwriting Of H.
+. Bachelor, but not as an expert. l
am well enough acquainted with it to
tell whether the Burleigh entry is in his
handwriting. should judge it was.
At this point Mr.. Porter asked for an
adjournment until this morning at 10
o'clock, which was granted.
FORMING SESSION.
The examination was resumed at 10
o'clock this morning, with Receiver
Knight still testifying, who said:
Regarding the Burleigh note No. 1857,
it was registered first as No. 4857 and
subsequently changed to No. 4s5s. 1t
also bears the number 1871" with a line
drawn through it. This number (373l)
is the number of the original Burleigh
note for e3.153.92. The bills receivable
register shows note No. 1871 as paid" on
Oct. %, 1892.
This statement brought forth an OBJ
lection by Judge Strevell on the ground
that the witness has no right to make
conclusions from what certain records
show. The commissioner ruled that the
witness was only testifying as to the
state of those records. and that his tes-
timony was, therefore. admissible. and
the witness then proceeded:
/ found note No. 373l and the other
notes attached to it. on taking possession
Of the bank. found with note No. 3731.a
note marked copy" dated May 30. 1891.
also Il note dated May %. 1891. No. 1871.
signed ANDREW +. Burleigh." also a note
with no number. same date, for sS73eO.
signed ANDREW +. Burleigh;' also a re-
ceipt dated Oct. 26. 1891. issued by the
Richmond Mining Co.. to VIM. Harmon.
trustee. for $1,000 for assessment No. /
and cost Of advtg." on eff. No. SO. for
10000 shares Richmond Co. capital stock.
l find no record Of the note Of sS73.6 on
the books of the bank, except in a copy
Of a letter dated Oct. p, 1892. enclosing
this note to f. A. Gardner. manager. for
collection. This letter is signed II. F.
Bachelor, PIT"
Quite a tilt preceded the opening Of
the next line of testimony. The wit
ness was asked how much Mr.. Bachelor
! owed the bank on the 18th Oct. 1892
This was s~trenuously objected to by the
defense as having no connection what
ever with the matters set forth in the
complaint. and as earnestly insisted upon
| by the prosecution, and on the assurance
Of Mr.. Porter that he would show con-
nection, the testimony was admitted
conditionally. the commissioner reserv-
ing the right to strike it out on reconsid-
GRAFTON. The witness then proceeded:
From the records, as far as l have been
| able to ascertain. Mr.. Bachelor was ow-
ing the bank On Oct.25 1892. in the neigh.
borhood Of $4,000. l could not say pos.
| itively how much stock he had without
referring to the stock book. He cOntin-
| ued to be a debtor to the bank until the
date Of its closing. took charge Aug.
9, 1893.
The witness then produced the general
journal Of the bank, and at request read
from it certain entries of Dec. 81, 1880,
relating to the Logan transaction. These
entries may be explained to show a
transaction by which two notes made by
L. II. Logan. dated June 30. 1890. and
for s2.5OO.OO and s2,262,56 respectively.
were grouped into one note for s5.O4s.24,
dated Dec. 81, 1s90.-Ed.l The prosecu-
! ton offered the portion of the page
| showing the entry in evidence. and the
defense objected for the reason that
other and irrelevant matter was included
in the entry. The objection was u G
tanned as to the exclusion Of the irrele-
want matter. and only that portion Of the
entry referring to the Logan notes was
allowed to go in. The witness her pro.
ceeded as follows:
The word Logan" in the entry refers
to T. H. Logan. / know this by the en-
tries on the bills receivable register.
which shows that the Logan notes re-
ferred to in the entry on the general
journal as No. 31O1, s2.5OO.OO; No. 31O2.
S2,262.56, and the note Tor S0.O4S.24, were
made by I. H. Logan. The bills receiv-
able register shows that notes Nos. 31O1
and 31O2 were paid December 81, 1890,
and on the same date the general jour-
nal shows a credit to Loans and Dis"
for No. 31Ol, e2,5O0.OO and for No. 31O2,
s2.262.56. The notes referred to as Nos.
3lO1 and 3l02 are still in the bank. un-
cancelled and unsigned. This state
ment will be more clearly understood
when it is explained that the notes 3lO1
and 3lO2 appear to have been made for
the purpose Of taking up two other notes
made and signed by T. H. Logan. Oct. I,
1889, and for e2.50O!OO and 81 ,93l.4 3 re-
| spectively. but we're never executed-Ed.l
The witness here produced the Logan
notes, Nos. 3lO1 and 31O2. but the de.
Tense objected to having them consid-
cred until it was shown that they were
in the same condition a. when the wit