The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-25
EXPLAINING BAD FEATURES.
Mr.. Winter Turns Attention to the
Governments Strong Points.

Mr.. Winter Turns Attention to the
Governments Strong Points.
AT o'clock yesterday morning Ferd Win
ter continued his argument on behalf Of the
defense, beginning with the consideration
of Count Ii of the Indictment which he
said was an exact duplicate OF the sixteenth
with the exception of slight differences in
the language These two counts, with
counts Nos. IA and To- he said were neither
specific nor general. but had reference to
transactions between certain dates. He took
up the consideration of these counts in
reference to priority date. Count No. Is
had reference TO the transactions from
March to May s. 1893. and charged the
misappication of ST., 1921 during that Pc
Rod. The period Of time covered by all
OF the indictments extended from March
to July IL, and included the date OF May O.
the time OF the deposit of $4,000 Counsel
argued that the effect OF the transactions
simply resulted in change OF credits with
out loss. and that no money was drawn out
Of the bank. He said upon the deposit of
the $4,000 there was nothing checked out,
but the deposit had simply been made to
take out paper upon which checks had been
drawn. this paper having been returned to
the bank The transaction of July Is. he
said. was exactly similar TO that of May
8. He said there was no denial of the fact
that during the time covered by indict-
ments IL to IS, inclusive, there had been a
large sum Of money paid to the cabinet
company by the bank. but the essence of
the charge was that in paying this money
Haughey was guilty of a willful misappli-
cation Of the funds of the bank and the
defendants aided and abetted him.
He then commented upon the testimony
Of Teller pohiuSop 10
acter Of the transactions between the COM
pany and the bank, citing the testimony
of the same witness in reference to the de-
posits made during the period OF time COW
cred by these counts OF the Indictment
showing the total deposits. exclusive OF the
paper Of the cabinet company, TO have
been sizes. 1l9.S3. Then he took up the checks
drawn. and, citing the overdraft of 5000
on Feb. 3 and credit of Sl34 on July IL.
said that Ii was apparent from the checks
introduced in evidence that they only ex-
ceeded the amount of these deposits in the
sum OF $1,000. and explained that it's fall
ure TO keep up was due TO the stringency
of money and frequent returD of paper.
In connection with these counts he took
and argued that no money was lost to the
bank by permitting the company TO wipe
out an overdraft by the deposit of it's pa
per or that of branch concerns. because it
was simply change of credits and the
bank still had a credit for the amount. OF
The n9sT df upon the paper Mr.
ton, upon the present financial condition
and that which spread over the country
tinued. He said the strngency of the
money market was responsible for the re-
turn OF large number of the cabinet COM
compelled to take up. He expatiated upon
the extent OF the business, and said for
the money lent the company IL put into
the bank drafts upon its customers day
by day, and the question for the Jury TO
decide was one of good faith as to whether
ing the drafts and the defendants in pre-
senting them. MIR. Winter then entered
of manufacturers and business men gen.
borrowed capital on account OF giving long
credit 10 his patrons, and being without
length of time.
he said the stress that had been laid
had borrowed from the bank more than
10 per cent of it's capital stock amounted
to nothing whatever. He admitted such to
be the fact. but said 1t was no crime
The law prohibited the loaning of money
in excess OF that limit, but made the dis
regard OF the law no crime.
The letters which passed between F. A.
Coffin Haughey and p. ID. Comm in rela-
ton 10 the attempt 10 organize the Lon
the debt to the bank was taken up. Mr..
Winter commented upon the fact of their
pens ia f tb s oi y b as
ment of all the papers Of the defendants
that Ii could get hold Of He said the
only purpose for which they could be intro
duced was 10 show the guilty intent OF the
defendants. as they antedated the period
covered by the Indictment. He took up
these letters separately and explained the
paragraphs upon which the government
had laid particular stress. The letter OF
p p. Coffin. in which he said he could
not take up the Lynch mortgage on ac-
count OF the presence OF a bank exam
liner was made the subject Of special com
ment, and explained on the line OF the tes-
timony of r. Il. Coffin while upon the wit
ness stand He went into the details OF
the entire London transactions brought
out in evidence, and then took up the
osition that men do not commit crimes
without motive, which proposition he fol-
lowed up with an argument 10 show the
lack of the establishment OF motive by
the evidence OF the government. He said
the government realizing this. had started
out I'm the upon the theory that the
money was seQuestered in London for the
benefit of the defendants but had been
blown out of water by the defense when
they showed that $4,000 more had come
back from London than went over.
He said the prosecution had failed TO
show that any OF the money borrowed from
PENDANTS in any way. In recurring TO the
operation of the London company he said
Il was shown by the testimony of the de-
Tense that $4,000 more came back than was
the receiver OF the company went 10 that
city he found assets valued at $4,000 ac-
cording TO English accountants, which,
added 20 the amount which was sent back
value OF the goods sent 10 the London
branch.
on the question Of the dividends that
had been declared by the company Mr..
Winter cited evidence to show that the
total amount of dividends did not amount
10 6 per cent. interest upon the capital In