The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1894-04-24
THE JURY SLEPT ON It.
An All Night Session Over the
Guilt or Innocence Of H. T.
Bachelor
TX. Gov. Toola and District At
tornoy Leslio Finish Up
tho Argum snts.
Judge Knowles Delivers Hts charge,
which l. oaits Long aud Covers
AL the Points.

The trial Of Harry f. Bachelor, for mis-.
using she funds OF the Stookgrowers' Ma
tional bank OF Miles City, is over. all bu,
she verdict Of the jury. The case was given
20 tae jury about half past four o'clock
yesterday afternoon. AZ the afternoon
wore along into she night. and the night
kept growing olde-. many Of she iurymen
sent messages home fos ovsIcoais and
blankets ani were evidently making prep
arations 90 spend the time till morning
sleeping between Arguments aud ballots.
All Of the days session OF the court was
taken ny Ia the conclnl ing arguments aud
the judges charge 90 the Jury. Gov. Tools
made the concluding argument for the de-
Tense IN she morning. lie reviewed the
evidence and claimed that Il showed moth
ing criminal on the part OF Bachelor. Rs-
fefring 90 ths testimony Of Bank Examiner
Wilson, he said be would NOT claim that
that officer had told what was not true Ia
regard 90 the CONVERSATION with the defend
ant, IN which the latter Is alleged 10 have
I said that he had taken the bank money. but
should not DO punished. because be had
nothing. bus hs would say that the eK-
sminer had thought over the thing until he
believed what be told about the ooHversa-
tion was true. lie referred 90 the good
| character OF the defendant. and said the
! jury must consider that, II that cut no
/ figure they might as well tell their children
shat good character was Of no uss TO
/ them. Referring 20 the purchase Of the
/ stsbbins stock, which he said was done in
4 the interest OF the bank. and TO the reduced
interest on the defendants notes. the COW
ernor said IL the discount COMMITTEES had
been the right kind Of men. they would not
/ have let Bachelor pay any interest. He
also refer ed 10 the security Afforded BY she
stock OF she Electric Light aud Water
company. whose property represented q
value OF $4,000. Judging from the claims
Of the prosecution one would suppose that
there was nothing to return TO she deposi-
tors since the bank failed. II she receiver
had paid as much attention 70 collecting
the assets of the bank as he had TO assist
ing the prosecution in getting up the in
dictmeut. the banh would have been In
good shape now. The governor closed with
strong personal plea for the acqaittal Of
the defendant. District Attorney Leslie
closed for the government. He said Il
would do no good 20 abuse the examiner
and the receiver. They were not on trial.
bat Harry /. Batche or was. lie wanted
10 know II there were 10 be two laws in
this countrY, one for the bank officer and
the OtAe for the man who stOls a COW. A
verdict Of guilty. he SAID. would have
good effect ell around.
Judge Knowles charge TO ths jury was
very long end ful. lie told them she
prosecution did not expect a conviction on
counts relating 10 the election expense
Items a. the e was no intent there to de-
ceive the bank or any officer, no matter
how reprehensIble the practice may have
[ been. As 70 the j. w Batcnelor notes
the Judge said it dill not appear that there
was any intention Of defrauding. &he notes
being merely accommodat on paper. Re
gardinQ the 6bstractIng OF notes the
evid-nos did not support tue charge. The
judge dwelt specially on the count charg-
ING fhe wi.ful manipulation OF over $40.
eco OF the banks funds between Jan. /,
1891, aud July ]. lsJ3. while president of
tie bank. with intent to iniurs the bank
aud the depositors. The first question was
money. Is wou q not be neces-
sarv 20 show that be misappled
that exact sum, II 10 we're
shown that he had misapp'ied over that
sum of less. 1t would be sufficient. Il would
be Wilful misapplic ,tion In this case II de-
PENDANT knowingly took for bis own use
and benefit a larger sam than any prudent
business man would have loaned him on the
secarity Ia possessed for the payment
the eof. IL made no dfs ence II he placed
his notes 80 sscuiitS therefor in the bank
ing association, payable thereto, or used
the notes Of his father. II bis father was not
pscuniarily responsible for She payment
therefor. To make tbs defendant crimin-
ally liable for the misappropriatiol Of the
money. the jaw must further find that be
iniende 10 injurs or def aud the bank.
You cannot 6nd that be so intended" the
Judge said. from she fact that he loaned
10 himself as president. individually, a
larger amount than the 10 per cent OF the
ca ital stock Of thu bank Neither
can you find that be intended to
defrGui and iniure the bank be-
cause the loan was an impr0vident one.
Bus the presumption of law Is that the de-
PENDANT intenied 20 do what WAS the natural
reaut of his conduct. II the natural result
OF his conduct in losnIng 80 large an
amount OF money 60 himself was 90 mi lure
aud defraud the bank. then II must be pre-
snmed as matter OF law that be intended
that sult
The defendant had urged that In pur-
chasing large amount OF capital stock Of
the bank he was acting for the benefit Of
the bank. 10 was for the jury to deter
I mine, the judge said. whether be was act
/ ing for the Dank or himself. The plea that
/ be wished 10 sell the stock 10 some Of the
wealthy stockmen should be considered
with reference 10 the evidence that he never
offered any Of 10 for salo 10 them. Other
money was Dor owed from the bank be-
sides that applied 90 tbs stock Transaction.
lie built Louise for himself invested
money Ia his fathers uams pa the sheep
business and in buying electric light stock
Tor himself lu considering whether be
wlilfuly misappiied tie funds the jury
should consider hla pacuuIarY responsibility
"a the time he borrowed the money aud
that he used bis fathers notes. IL was
a.so fof the jury 60 say whether be really
had undertaken sucl a work for the bank
N buying up ita stock with is own money
IS would have entitled him 20 take the
MONEYS Of TIE bank 40 the rate OF SIX per
cent Ter annum.
The Iudge said tho ossence Of the ofsnsa
WaH tle intent. he wlliull and criminal
mlaapulIcatlon Of funds o. a national
bank did NOS Include evrrv case Of wrong
tul application. A wilful misapplication
must Do with intent 90 iniure or defraud
he jury were inst uctsd tnat th- fact that
I the bank bad failed should not be allowed
[ 90 prejudice the defendants case. Hrs acts
must De measu OF by what ho did 81 tho
TIMES charged, Ia connection with his mo-
/ .iVe anu intent. IL no acted from good
/ falth and from honest convictions u duty
/ 90 tho bank, % was 81 no consequence u
I bic iu gmeLt was AZ fault o. that the
count oi H. The defendant must not
+ only have intended g. repay tlu money nc
I borrowed; he must have mad reasonable
+ en octatlon ~ rrpnYing %.
On The subject ot $40 alleged falss en-
I tries, the In-ge slll tho jury must deter
mine Wuethe tLeF were calculated % de-
f celFe. However err1urouat hs entries yer.
] q they were not attended o deceive. thrr.
] a.na NO criminal rnIIIfrr Ia e.urIualrr