The Helena independent., 1894-12-14
NOT GUILTY AGAIN.
VIII Hanks Is Acquitted on the Trial Of
the Second Of tho Five
Indictments.
THE JURY OUT ONLY A SHORT TIME.
But Two Ballots Were Taken, One informal
and One Formal and the Verdict
Reached.
THE JURY OUT ONLY A SHORT TIME.

WIN Hanks has no reason TO bc fear
tul OF the number "thlrtcon." lie was
married ON the 18Th day of the month
and there woW thirteen guests at the
wedding feast Yesterday whs the
thirteenth day OF The month OF pecem-
Der and the thirteenth day uf his TRIAL.
and the jury had made up their minds
"a a verdict 90 not guilty In Just thir-
tocn minutes after they retired After
the verdict was rendered Hanks and
twelve plhcr men went out aud took
"a drink together IL was Hanks see
ond trial aud his second ucdnlttnl. II
disposrs of two OF the fiNc indictments
found against Hanks about "A year ago.
What will be done with the other three
Is not yet known, but It is certain they
Will not bc tried az this term of court
The Indictment on which Hanks WIS
tried this time charged him with will
fully misapply lng S26,22I28 of the
funds of the Merchants National bank
~ Great Falls. while It's president, The
alleged misapplcatlnu was by means of
chccks ana notes ot his own. and notes
on account ot partnerships and some
given as accommodation The ndict-
ment on which he was tried last spring
charged the misapplicntion VI money
used in the Maginnis mining proper
ties at Maiden.
When the United States court met
! yesterday morning Attorney T. H.
Garter at once began the closing argu-
ment for the defense lie detailed the
various transactions relied upon by the
prosecution. showing that In each case,
from his point of view. Hanks purpose
was honest and his intentions entirely
free from criminal faint The defense
did not contend that the bank had been
administered in conformity with the
highest type Of banking principles;
that there had been mismanagement
no reasonable person could deny; that
there had been crlminality ON the part
| OF Hanks. no one could reasonably as
sumo, The eNigencics which confronted
the bank management on July II, 1895,
! can be accounted for by reference To
the extraordinary conditions which PIE
vailed throughout the country dO!ins
the summer uf that year MIR. Carter
suggested that II all the men who We're
unable TO meet their engagements dur
! ing those months were confined within
prison walls for such delinquency po-
sitions as guards OF conNicts would SO
begging Tor want OF men Ia I'LL them.
lie closed by asking that faithful con
| siderAtiun be given in the name OF the
veteran soldier, the father OF the de-
fendant. whose bones rested on the site
of n southern battlefield in the name OF
his infant children who had an Interest
In this case. and In behalf OF his anx-
ious wife. who sat in the court room,
hoping that verdict might be rendered
ia conformity with justice and so hop
ing she had no fears OF evil 10 her un-
fortunate husband"
District Attorney Leslie closed for the
government. He went over each trans
action which had been shown by the
books or detailed In the testimony OF
witnesses and said that no bank could
prosper under such management. The
transfer OF the Hanks ranch 10 l.. II.
Hershfeld the district attorney de-
n0unced as a clear intention TO defraud
the creditors OF the bank. 1t was maxi
ing an other creditors Of the Great
Falls bank stand aside that l.. II, Hersh-
field might be secured for the indebted
ness of Hanks and Ilolfe to his bank
The taking up OF the note Of Mrs. Hanks
by the accommodation note OF w. u.
Benson was looked upon as removing
solvent piece Of paper and replacing II
with a worthless piece. The Cascade
bank transaction was also denounced
as am unlawful transaction, as the pa
per was the property Of the bank and
| Hanks had no right 10 remove X.
| judge Knowles, in his instructions,
/ said the jury must consider only the
charge of wilfully misapplying money
| with intent ~ defraud. but there was no
| testimony ~ warrant verdict OF guilty
under the counts relating TO the Benson
notes. ms no money had been drawn out
| by these notes. The jury, however would
| consider these notes as evidence Of in
tent The fact that the directors dele
| gated the management NJ the bank 10
| Hanks gave him no right 10 use the
bank or its funds as II they were his
own. II the iurymcn found that Hanks
/ had mlsapplird the money charged they
! should then drtcrmiue whether II was
! with intent To- dcfraud. Every man was
| presumed 90 intend what was the lrgi-
innate outcome ~ his own acts. The
Judge gave all the instructions asked
| for by the defense, Among other things
| these Instructions said that II the jury
could rcconcnp Hanks transactions
| with any reasonable hypothesis Of In
npccuoc. ne was entitled to the benefit
Of the doubt The fact that the Mcr-
| chants bank had failed was not 10
prejudice his case. Presumption as Ia
the Intent uf mans acts might be
overcome by other evidence II must
appear 90 the jury that the guilty In
tom existed in Hanks mind az the time
of his transaction, with the bank
The Jury retired shortly after 4
o'clock aud gnpn after everybody In the
court room had scattered, word came
that an agreement had been reached.
II took some tmr to hunt up the de
r.ndant and the lawyers, sp that II wus
well after half past when the verdict
inc declared 'nut guilty" was the re-
; / cipirNt uf mHIy congratulations
Thr jury took hut lwu ballots. The
. iHmnmd ballet r.opd ten for 1Cgulil1l
. / nn1 hru iur conviction The formal
bpi.ot stood twnlyo for pu1uuul