The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-23
FOUR COUNTS WITHDRAWN.
The Evidence Was Not Sufficient to
susfnfu Them.


The Evidence Was Not Sufficient to
Sustain Them.
Promptly at o'clock the court convened
for the afternoon session. Reed was again
called to the stand by Mr.. Winter to ex-
plain how entries of drafts of later dates
appeared upon a page in the bonds book
preceding the entry of the $4,000. He ex-
planned the entry by saying the entries
upon the preceding page had reference only
to London drafts and the first entry upon
1t was made during the month Of April.
1.-The defense rests" said Mr.. Winter.
BY the Court-Proceed with your rebuff
ting.
Mr.. Kern-We offer in evidence the deed
records of Marion county. presume there
is no question as to the authenticity of the
records.
Mr.. Duncan-None at ALL
Mr.. Kern then read from the records a
copy of the deed by the Sewing Machine
Cabinet Company transferring to +. A.
Coffin, w. +. Coffin and John Roberts the
real estate, factory, buildings and all ma
chinery and fixtures annexed thereto, owned
by the Sewing Machine Cabinet Company,
for a consideration of $4,000 Then the re-
lease of the mortgage was read.
That's all, your Honor" said Mr.. Burke.
when the reading of the records was COM
pleted.
us that al for the defense?" asked Judge
Baker
That's ALL" answered the defense.
How many speeches will there beT'
asked the court.
1t was agreed that there should be three
speeches to the side. Judge Baker said he
did not care 10 limit counsel in their argu-
Inent, but desired that the case be present
ed to the jury some time during Saturday
afternoon.
better than that presume" answered Mr..
Kern.
Before the argument was begun District
Attorney Burke agreed THAT the evidence
adduced against the defendants was not
sufficient to establish their guilt under any
of the counts charging them with having
aided and abetted Haughey in making false
entries in reports made by him TO the Con-
troller of the Currency, and all or these
counts were withdrawn from the jury by
the court The counts thus Withdrawn are
Nos. 49, 10 and 90, which are the last three
counts of the indictment. 1t was also found
by comparison that Counts ana 4. Were ere
request of Mr. Winter the latter or these
was also withdrawn from the jury and
they were instructed not to consider any OF
the evidence introduced under either of
these counts.
In the argument Deputy District Attorney
Corr opened for the government. de VIII
be followed by Messrs. Winter and Harvey
for the defense, then Mr. Kern will speak
for the government, and he Will be foi-
lowed by Mr.. Duncan for the DEFENSE, DIS
trict Attorney Burke closing for the gov
Mr.. Corr. in the opening argument. re-
counted in a general way Wnet was
charged in the counts of the indictment.
He said II was a misapplication or the
funds OF the bank by Haugney IN allowing
regard to the security given to the BANK.
lie argued that the giver Of the drafts as
aiding and abetting. Hangney was esta az,
naper upon which the false entries were
made and which was used by Haughsy to
deceive the bank examiners. He said the
increase of the debt of the cabinet COMPANY
was by the direct sanction or Haughey
and TO the benefit OF the cabinet compa n;
During the course OF his remarks he scored
r. A. Coffin In scathing terms and de-
nounced his testimony as false SAVING ne
displayed an utter disregard for the truth
In his testimony as TO the Value OF the
He said Francis Coffin got as near to
the truth as he ever did when ne said that
the real estate, buildings and machinery
at the time of the purchase, YET the. gov
eminent introduced the records ss OF th the
one-half that amount had been paid,
in fact, for the property Inc purpose OF
II appear that the property of the company
was of immense value, Tut IL was lnlnla-
terial to the charge against them or aiding
IN the nllSdIpIlcdlOD VI tic
bank if the property was worth $l000,00O.
In speaking in the variance in the showing
of profits upon the English and American
basis the deputy district attorney said tne
"shy Mr.. Coffin was very ready with his
explanation to explain away the dlnerence
In speaking of the London transactions
and visit of F. A. Coffin TO the British cap
ital he said ii was apparent from the evl-
dence that the real purpose OF the trip TO
I'm lands w the fer cabinet sh and r
duce it's debt to the bank, and that both
Haughey and Coffin knew the condition OF
the company. Mr.. Corr said that Haughey
did not call halt" as he said in a letter
to F. A Coffin while in London that he
would have to do. because he feared ex-
thought the letter showed the defendants
to be aiders and abetters. He said the
conduct of the defendants contradlcted ev-
erything they had testified to upon the
witness stand. and argued that the conduct
of the business showed that IL was not
profitable as testified to by all OF the de-
fendants He said the London branch was
paper machine" and not cabinet com
pany, and the purpose Of its organization
from london when he told his brother to
give its paper for the limit. The men in
their testimony admitted that they drew
drafts on a company when there was moth
ing due from that company to draw upon.
Mr.. Corr took up the organization OF
each c9nnected COMPANY re sS,dItY tpf
which paper OF these companies found its
way into the bank. THE United States
company, ne sald, was crsdhlzeu lor the
purpose OF making cheap paper instead of
cheap desks" He said all the branch con-
Germs were losing ventures. and the defend
ants knew that the business was being car
ried on at a loss. but kept them up for
the purpose of piling up debt with the
bank. After speaking at some length upon
the branch concerns. the evidence relating
to the overdrafts was taken up and ii
was argued by counsel that Haughey was
cognizant OF the transactions of all the
companies, and that when he paid out
money upon their paper III was willful
and intentional misapplication of the funds
of the bank, the thing the government
charged against him. In speaking of the
testimony of +. A. Coffin that the drafts
were drawn at the suggestion of Haughey
for the purpose of securing his lien upon
the goods Mr. Corr became very sarcastic,
on that point although he did not be-
lieve one word OF it He accepted it be-
cause he thought IL the clearest proof
that could be adduced to show willful
-.