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

He Fires Rroadsides Into Mr.. Winters
Ingenious Arguments

~
Ingenious Arguments.
John w. Kern concluded his argument
yesterday morning before the federal court
jury. In opening his argument he said he
had not realized until he begun his argu-
ment yesterday to what extent his strength
mad been sap0ed by the nearly forty days
ana nights OF work entailed by this and
the former trial, and he feared he would not
De able 10 go into the argument as ex-
tensively as he had wished but in this case
his loss would probably be their gain i'm a
saving Of time. Then entering into the
cist of the case he called the attention
or the jury to the shadow companies.
which, he said, it was claimed did not de-
ceive Haughey, but this was not the ques-
ton. The question was whether these COM
ranies were used to deceive the agents OF
the government, and to show the intent of
the defendants he cited the testimony Of
expert accountant Hays to the effect that
Reed had admitted to him that the paper
of these companies was not drawn against
value. and one had ever pretended that
1t was drawn up on value. Mr.. Kern said
whatever the purpose of the organization
OF these companies they were used 10 de-
ceive the bank examiners whom the depos-
itors depended upon to protect their money
in the bank With all these Connected
companies II was not difficult for these
defendants to devise ways and means to
OBTAIN money and credit and wipe out over
drafts. When overdraft of $4,000 was
complained OF by Haughey f. A. Coffin
simply instructed Reed to draw drafts upon
one or more OF the fictitious companies
and deposit them in the bank and in addi-
ton to wiping out the overdraft the de-
PENDANTS received credit at the bank for
the amount of deposit against which they
could check
A striking fact in connection with the
operations of all these branch concerns is
that from the time the first one was or
ganized down to the present time not a
single draft drawn by or upon any of them
has eyer been paid. and none of these drafts
had ever been treated as commercial pa
per. Taking up the memorandum book of
Reed. Mr.. Kern read the entries contained
in it showing the overdraft of the cabinet
company to have been $4,000 less memoran-
dunn deposits of $4,000 leaving an apparent
overdraft of over $4,000. He asked what
was meant by a memorandum deposit, and
answered his own question to the effect
that 1t an admission by the defend
ants that they regarded these deposits as
worthless. and that the purpose of max
ing them was TO deceive the bank exam
liner and prevent his discovery of the fla
grant violation of the national banking law.
Then taking up stenographic report of
the evidence OF expert Hays TO the
statements of Reed in relation TO the
$4,000 deposit on May g. 1898, he read state
Haughey by. Reed. to the effect that
Few days prior to this time Haughey had
an cverdraft because report to the Con-
troller. might be called for or visit from
a bank examiner might be expected. Con-
tinuing, Mr. Kern said:
In the face of this evidence. which is
uncontradicted, the counsel for the defense
comes before you and says no motive has
been shown to Reed and that, as he got
none of the swag, be could have no motive
TO be a party TO any criminality. With an
enrontery that is unusual in criminal cases
+. a Coffin comes before you and says,
I alone am responsible; 1 am the Jesse
James of the whole gang When crime
has been proven against person the ques-
ton OF motive has no consideration. 1t is
only when there is doubt as TO the guilt
OF the accused that the question OF motive
defendants is established by the testimony
of Reed, which shows that they had knowl-
edge of Haughey's intention TO deceive the
agent OF the government and aided him in
doing II you do not believe that Louis
Robinson told the truth, the testimony of
Reed is sufficient TO establish guilt. But
do you believe that Louis Robinson testi-
fled falsely? 1 am willing 10 stake the case
OF the government upon the issue OF YER
acity between Louis Robinson and F. ~
Coffin.
In support of the charge of the govern
ment ana as showing that the defendants
had knowledge OF Haughey's intention,
Mr.. Kern took up the letter OF +. b. Coffin
TO +. A. Coffin, while the latter was in
London in which was contained the state
ment that the Lynch mortgage could not
be taken up on account of the presence OF
a bank examiner in the town. He fired
a broadside into the explanation OF this
paragraph made by Mr.. Winter and riddled
IL at one volley. The counsel for govern
ment said the real meaning OF the para
graph was not that Haughey was too busy
with the bank examiner to attend TO
taking up the mortgage as claimed by the
defense, but that the bank could not take
the worthless paper while the bank ex-
aminer was there. Then the sale OF the
New York and Boston branches was taken
uD and the evidence directly and incident
ally relating TO IL was recounted. Mr.
Kern said the Zine Italian hand OF Francis
A Coffin was seen through all the trans
actions He commented upon the sale OF
the first maturing Clark and Pierce notes
to Lydia r. Coffin after the sale of the
New York and Boston branches The effect
of this sale, he said. was 10 remove the
property from under the lien OF the bank
and transfer to l. r. Coffin the amount re-
allied on the notes which were bought in
for a nominal sum.
In this connection he took up the testi-
mu1 II IL. J. Smith 10 the effect that, in