The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-04-10
himself with 5000. as having depogited that

company had not deposited that sum or
The sixty-slxth count is the third of the
five. and 1t charges that by virtue. of his
office as president Of the bank and with
aaugeg myyapped 5R% the the @Gneys funds
and credits of the bank with intent TO con-
vert them to the use of the INDIANAPOLIS
Cabinet Company and other persons In the
amount of $12. 1921. The Cabinet Company,
il charged, had no money credits
against which it could draw. and was, in
fact insolvent, as Mr.. Haughey knew.
The ndred-and-forty-thir count,
which comes next, is the one which charged
July II, 1898, among the false entries made
being the cutting down Of the overdrafts
1881 aSoa Snat h9g ao TsE and he r.
titled checks and cash items from about
$50, .36 to $l257S.13. This count is of great
length and charged a general fixing-up of
the statement TO suit the exigencies of
the critical situation
The last Of the guilty counts is ninety
ing three certificates of deposit payable
to himself for $4,000 each on July 10. two
no funds on deposit These certificates
were indorsed to the National Bank of
the Republic; of Chicago: III, and It is
were so issued and deposited by Mr..
Haughey to deceive the bank examiner:
the law fixes the punishment for the
known charged in these counts at from
five to ten years Imprisonment Mr..
than five years, and could, on the five
counts, be sentenced 10 fifty years. This is
a matter entirely, OF course, within the dis
cretion of Judge Baker. The minimum SEN
tence he can impose is five years. His task
is not an enviable one to say the least.
This move of Mr.. Haugheys attorneys is
generally conceded to be a shrewd one,
and the wisest possible under the circum-
stances. a conviction was inevitable, and
of the 167 counts in the indictment the five
chosen for a plae of guilty have evidently
been selected with view of getting away
from the charge of forgery and various
other more odious in character than the
ones the truth of which are thus admitted.
The proceeding Of last evening is the talk
of the city. and almost everybody, com
mends the plea as the best thing the de-
fendant could do for himself.
THE COFFIN CASES.
The first of these cases to be tried now
will be those of Francis A. Coffin, Percival
B. Coffin and Albert s. Reed, who were
indicted jointly on charges of aiding and
abetting Theodore p. Haughey in misap-
plying the bank funds and in making false
entries and reports TO cover up the same.
and fbsr are fy rscta IN IN th imS rs
counts Of the manner in which money was
obtained from the bank by the Indianapolis
Cabinet Company, an insolvent concern, be-
tween Jan. l. 1891. and July %, 1S93 The
100000.
The government elected to try this case
after that against Theodore p Haughey
had been disposed Of Unless Judge Baker
DEGREES differently, these three men will
have to be tried together He can grant
them separate trials, but is not likely 10 do
even If they desire il, and IL is not known
c. Harris, anu Miller, Winter & Elan. The
with their trial but it is not no 't at ali iu un-
likely that their attorneys may ask for
continuance, which is not, however, likely
to be granted. Everything at the federal
court now Is in readiness for the opening
n tn6 nd will Aa oaIl la1
at o'clock this morning. The ordinary
seating capacity of the room has been
doubled and ample accommodations made
for the attorneys and newspaper repre-
sentatives. Many of the jurymen sum-
moned reported yesterday, th!rty-two an
swering TO their names at the roll call in
the morning. John III. Holiday and James
II. Laymar were present from the city.
By noon fifty of the eighty-eight men sum-
until this morning at 8 O'Clock Several
were reported sick, and when John c. Ur-
baltn's name was ctlled a juryman an
nounced that he had recently dropped dead
of heart disease. Mr.. Urbalin lived at VAL
paraiso.
Theodore P. Haughey will he summoned
as a witness against the Collins and Mr..
Reed. There is no doubt of this 'rhe gov
ernment can and will call him 20 the stand
to tell what he knows Of the business
methods of these three men In connection
with the wrecking of the indianapolis Ma
tional Bank. The friends of RIr. Haughey
are already hoping for an early pardon for
him. The belief is entertained iIl some
quarters that his evidence for the govern
ment will have considerable influence in
securing for him executive clemency lust
as his plea of guilty will mitigate his SEN
tence. Mr.. Haugheys attorneys have given
his case the closest possible study. and this
move of theirs has been considered from
all possible bearings. That they hope to
reap much benefit from il TOR their aged
client there is no doubt.
The interest in the case has in no wise
a6ated' and the attendance at the opening
trials this morning promises to be the
largest known in years at the federal
court room.
COUNTS AGAINST THE COFFINS.
The first sixteen counts in the indictment
against the Collins and Reed charge that
President Haughey misapplied this amount
in paying it out on checks and drafts which
he knew TO be worthless, and that Francis
A. Coffin, Percival b. Coffin and Albert S.
Reed were guilty of aiding and abetting the
crimes The seventeenth, eighteenth nine
teenth, twentieth twenty-first, twenty-sec-
ond and twenty-third counts show how the
sum of $4,000 was paid out Of the bank to
the Indianapolis Cabinet Company between
Jan 1, 1891, and July 20, 1888, by cashing a
large number of notes known TO be worth
less and upon inSolvent persons. 1t is
also shown that this amount is above the
ten-per-cent. limit, UPON which basis loans
are made by law.
The twenty-fourth To the thirty-sixth
counts recites the story of how the bank
was looted of $4,000 at various times be-
tween Jan. l. 1891 and July 25 1893 by
cashing worthless checks and drafts drawn
by and upon worthless persons, by loan
ing money TO the Indianapolis Cabinet Com
pany, by allowing the cabinet company to
overdrdw it's accounts, and, to conceal the
overdrafts, Haughey received from the
company large number of worthless
notes and gave credit to the company on
the books for the face value of the notes
all of which were of insolvent persons as
follows: OF Francis A Coffin, $21, ,927. so; of
Percival B. Coffin, $27, 1868; of the Indian
apolis Cabinet Company, $50, 1929; Of the
indianapolis Plow Company, $302i2.0j; of
the Indianapolis Veneer and Panel Com
pany, $Sl, 42293; notes and drafts on the
American Desk and Seating Company of
Cabinet Company, Of Boston, $50. POS. % /;
drafts on the indianapolis Desk Company
of London, England, Si0,S37.H; drafts on
the indianapolis Office Furniture Company
United States Office Furniture Company
S26, ,062. g. drafts on the Wooten Desk Com
pany, of Richmond, Ind, $4S565.33 1t is
charged that Haughey knew that each of
these persons, firms companies and cor
poratiCns were insolvent and the Collins
and Reed aided and abetted him.
The indictment further charges that the
Collins and Reed were parties to the false
entries and reports made by Theodore p
Haughey, which were made at various
affairs of the bank and TO deceive the
agents of the government whose duty il is
to examine national banks. On March 30
1892, an entry was made in the ledger show
ing that the indianapolis Cabinet Company
had deposited $50 S0.16. Under date Of May
9, 1898. the company is credited with de-
poSit OF Sff0O0: on Jan. 6, 1893, with S23-
069.04; on JAM ), 1893, with s., 72310; on Sept
H. 1892. with S13,273.09.
The forty-eighth, forty ninth and fiftieth
counts are the same as those in the indict-
ment against Schuyler c. Haughey. and
charge the Collins and Reed with being par