The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-26

Mr.. Duncan commented at length upon
the evidence which had been introduced 70
ness OF the cabinet company, which was
shown by the testimony TO have spread
over nearly the civilized world. IN the
handling of the defendants attorney a vast
~ different construction was placed upon
the evidence upon which the government
infant OF every act of the defendants. ana
that they were acting as aiderS and abetters
to him in the transactions. Mr.. Duncan
posted upon all the dealings of the cabinet
company as an evidence OF good faith on
the part OF the Defendants. and showing ing
bank. He thought men trying TO loot the
bank would not keep its president so thor
oughly posted upon the condition of their
business. Mr.. Duncan cited the testimony
as to the amounts paid out for material
and labor during the period covered by the
indictment, and reading from abstracts or
evidence. said the amount paid out for
labor alone was equal TO the entire debt
to the bank, though it had been asserted
that all the money the cabinet company
had was drawn from the bank.
They have had our books, said Mr..
pt his aaS ther bs sby ana nay his
found It C cut f the the money had not
would have. been called upon to deny it
before YOU" The evidence pertaining TO
the establishment of the various branches
taken up and commented upon as showing
honest intention. Mr. Duncan said the
completion Of plant OF the eba ma Mart af
years, and that it was not the usual con-
duct of a bank looter TO put money into
cages Upon the property to secure the loan
THE life of the defendants" he said, you
are told through period of ten years ri or
yet they preserved every check they ever
drew and every letter they wrote and
turned them over to the receiver of their
company after consultation with the re-
ceiver of the bank"
In support OF the claim that the failure
of the bank was due to the money strin-
gency prevailing at the time and not the
money borrowed by the cabinet company
the testimony OF Receiver Hawkins was
cited showing that there was in the bank
doubtful and worthless paper, exclusive of
the cabinet company's paper. amounting TO
$S60,0I01. Upon the question OF intention
of the defendants he referred 70 the TACT
that their attorney had consulted with the
receiver OF the bank as to whom he would
like to have appointed receiver Of the COM
pany, the natural construction OF which:
he said, was that it was an evidence or
their desire to protect the bank and turn
over their assets to man VINO would pe
friendly to the receiver OF the bank. For
transactions with the cabinet company
and and not OFT the pecuiations of bank robbers
the evidence relating to the value OF the
plant, as testified to by witnesses, was
cited by Mr.. Duncan and argued forcibly;
The evidence upon this point was detaileu
the testimony of all witnesses showed the
plant TO be OF great value and was ample
security for the debt of the cabinet COM
pany. Appraisers of the receiver testified
that their valuation was upon the basis or
what the property would bring under the
testified to by witnesses for the defense as
a basis 1t was argued that r A conn
statement to Haughey of the assets and
liabilities of the company in January OF
1898. To impress his points forcibly upon
the minds of the jury the valuation or
each witness upon the different classes of
property was considered separately ana IN
detail The character ana demeanor OF
each witness and his ability TO judge or the
facts to which he testified also favor
ably commented upon by Mr.. Duncan, ana
he argued that under all the circumstances
the defendants had a right TO represent
their property to have been worth all they
did represent it TO be worth, and the fact
that they did represent il to be or this
value could not iegitimately be construed
as an evidence that they had criminal IN,
tent at the time paper was discounted
ton OF assets attention was paid TO the
valuation Of patents by the defendants, sas
well as the good VIII OF the COMPANIES a ara
innate value to be given TO each or these
two items of assets. Then the mucn,inoo,ed
panies came in for consideration a second
time at the hands of the defendants coun-
sci. The organization of each or the com
panies was taken up in turn and the rea-
sonableness of the causes for their incor-
poration as testified to by the defendants
was argued to the men who are nnally 10
pass u1on the antagonistic theories of the
defense and government. the evidence OF
the defense was that all or the companies
except the Wooten and United States COM
panies had been incorporated to protect
the names and as going TO snow the
reasonableness OF this explanation ora II S Was
porated months before they were estaD,
iished in business, and the defendants SAID
the stocking up Of the companies WAS an
aft
The sales of the New York and Boston
branches were explained on q line Win
the evidence of the defenda5nts tnat t nney
had been made upon the advice or their
attorney. The preferences given TO cred
itors by the sales was also explained;
Mr. Duncan said: ''Over here e. Richmond
was an old LADY, named Swift who had
loaned the company $500 of her money
and held a mortgage for S290,OOO TO Sc
cure her claim and some or the notes oe-
rived from these sales were turned over
to her; and are you going to say these
defendants were dirty scoundrels for doing
it? They also gave some OF the notes
TO Mr.. Smith, down at Seymour, from
whom they had purchased logs for years
and to whom they owed money: MT.
Smith had no security by mortgage Tor TINS
debt, and are you going to put II down
against these men when you come 10 con-
slider the question OF their gullt or lnno-
cence because they desired to secure Mr.
Smith the payment of money they owed
him for the logs they had purchased!
Mr. Duncan also JUSTIFIED the turning
sister-in-law, to secure her claim for divi-
dends which she had permitted the COM
pany to retain and turn back INTO the
plant for it's Improvement ana also the
securing to the Greencastle bank its claim
for So 600. Then the Baker draft trans
action, which has been the subject OF IRE,
quent comment during the progress or the
| trial. was given the attention or the coun-
| sci. He alluded to the evidence that this
draft with a check for insurance on the
Boston house had been sent to brother
of the Collins in Chicago and currency
| Coffin. THAT is true, gentlemen, said
| Mr.. Duncan. and all the letters and tele-
| grams relating to that transaction and in
| troduced in evidence here were turned
| over by my clients to the receiver OF the
| cabinet company and by him to the
| PENDANTS desired any concealment of this
| transaction? The currency shipped TO +.
| B. Coffin was used by the cabinet company
| to pay it's workmen, and do you think
| they were guilty of crime In paying the
workmen who had given their labor to
| the company
| At this point the clock indicated the
| journment, and Mr.. Duncan suggested that
| the adjournment be taken at that time.
you will have TO conclude your argu-
ment to-day" answered Judge Baker. Mr..
| Duncan preferred continuing his argu-
ment az that time to returning for night
| court was continued TO enable him to COM
| plete his presentation OF the evidence. he
| turned his attention at this time to the
evidence relating to the entire SolVency
| of the company, and argued at length 10
| the jury that the question Tor them to
| transaction complained Of the defendants
| and Haughey did believe and had right