St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-06-23
NOW FOR THE DEFENSE.
The STATES EVIDENCE ~ SJREE1-
ER'S TRIAL IS al Ill.,
MOrIoN
y
DISMISSAL.


Inc DeIenuant'S Attorneys claim
the Prosecution Has Failed to
Make Out a Case-Judge Rus.
sell Is of a Different Opinion
a-d Orders tn, Case to Con-
tinuc-Yesterday's Testimony.
The state has finished its side of the
famous Streeter case. Assistant COnn-
ty Attorney Peterson announced yes
-terday afternoon ats o. clock that the
state. would rest, and Judge Shaw re-
marked terSely that it was about time.
How long 1t will take him to present
his clients side of the case does not
appear. S. NJ. Houghton. who is under
indictment for the. same offense that
Mr.. Streeter is being tried for. was ar
raigned in the criminal court during
tine forenoon and asked to plead to the
charge Of grand larceny. the indictment
setting forth that he has willfully mis-
appropriated s70.S23.77. His attorney,
George Ii. Taylor. Instructed him TO
plead not guilty. and this he did. His
bail was fixed at $500.
j. NJ. Norris was recalled to the wit
ness stand in the Streeter case when
court opened for the morning session.
He was cross-eXainined carefully by the
defense, and 1t was endeavored to show
that Mr.. Streeter was really the man
who attempted to keep Menage from
going into the extremes that he did.
The witness admitted that Menage did
the greater part of the business by is
suing checks on the Security bank.
The next witness, Thomas F. lnger-
soil. testified to having written one OF
the riders" submitted as evidence, and
to having filled out blank. notes and
riders" from memoranda placed on his
desk. Mr.. Peterson asked him:
TN whose handwriting were the
memoranda furnished to you?"
I'm different handwIitinss-som
times Streeter's and sometimes Hough>
TOMS, and then, again, they would be
typewriter"
ibid you write the same story for
the same man OH different notes. or did
you write different story on different
nOtes?"
Il wrote the same story on the notes
signed by the same man."
"Who instructed you to do thlS?o
~ don't remember that any one did;
think know enough for that"
''How did you know they were the
same notes?"
by the signature and the name at
tached." was the reply. Further, the
witness stated that he saw the notes
signed in ''block'' OIL Mr.. Stree;eris
desk OH one occasion, and that the
blank notes signed We're handed to him
by Mr.. HOughton, MIR. Cole and other.
Hiram X. Cole testified that he had
made out the body of notes and riders
that were brought to him signed from
memoranda also brought to him. Some
of the memoranda from which he filled
in these notes were brought to him by
Miss ROsencranZ,an and others were in the
handwriting OF Messrs. Streeter, Hougll-
ton and IngersoIl. He could rot state
positively that he had filled out the
notes under the personal instructions OF
either Mr.. Streeter OF Mr.. Houghton.
During the afternoon session j. W.
Lawrence testified to receiving notes
: for the First National Bank of What
Cheer, To-, for collection, and that he
had been unable to find the signers.
w. a. Moves. attorney for the MiIwau-
kee road, stated that he mad been given
notes for collection and was unable to
find the signers. He asked Mr.Stree ter
= il the names OF the signers were wholly
fictitious, and was told they were the
names Of real persons. AT this point in
the proceedings recess was taken, and
then 1t was announced that the prosecu-
ton had concluded.
Mr.. Lancaster, for the defense, was on
his feet III an instant. and in long ar
gument asked the court to order the
states attorneys elect upon which items
they would 90 to the jury. Although
Judge Russell had expressed the opin-
ion at the opening of the trial. that the
state should elect. he found that the
statutes of the state did not apply in
this case. 2 sti'l4
The statute made the provision
where agents. servants or clerks were
concerned. The court. however. held
Mr.. Streeter 10 be an officer of the Guar
anty Loan company. and on this ground
refused to order the state to elect.
The jury was then excused while
Judge Shaw argued for a dismissal of
the case on several grounds. He claimed
that the Indictment charged larceny,
when the proof put in by the state tend
ed to show embeZZlement. \ man could
net be tried on different charge than
the one made in the Indictment.
Again, that there was not enough
evidence in the case against Streeter to
SViitt Lie CASE " luC july. ASdlu, tudt
evidence did not show that the defend
ant ever had in his possession any
moneys of the Guaranty Loan company,
as charged i'll that part of the indict-
ment, viz: Lawful, genuine and cur
rent money of the United States"
Again, Judge Shaw argued that all
the preliminary evidence only showed
that the business OF handling notes was
performed by the company, as Menage
was client of the company and not an
officer. When Menage, as such client,
placed the notes In the market, at that
time the embeZzlement took place. The
judge claimed that Mr.. Streeter for the
compa had right to negotiate notes
gwen them by private parties without
liability.
Il think it is clearly a question for
the jury to SETTLE" remarked Judge
Russell quietly, and court was adjourned
until Monday morning.
WDrNuT3S rEMnro