The Helena independent., 1894-12-04
HOW IT COT 50 BIG
THE NOTES AND THE ovERDeAFrs.
When the Account Was Closed on July 10
1893, His Indebtedness Had Reached
Over S25 900,

was on the witness stand all day yes
tcrdny In the United States court. ex
planning the different transactions bl
which the government II endenvorinl
TO show that VIII Hanks, while presl
dent of that institution, mlsappropri
ated s25. .227, ~ OF the moneys, funds and
credits ~ the bank There was an In
tormlssion for dinner, and some littl'
time given to the AFFAIRS OF other pcopl,
who either have business with IN,
court, or with whom the court has bust
ness; but apart from these Interrupt
tions, from 10 In the morning till 6 IL
the afternoon. the day was given up Il
the Hanks case.
Most, In fact practically all, Of Book,
Keeper Burns testimony was In the nat.
uro OF figures from the books Of the
bank. He had gotten into the books
Tor a period covering some six weeks
from the time the bank opened when the
defense got IN an exception. The law.
yers wanted the books submitted 10 the
jury instead of having the bookkcepeI
explain the entries bearing ON IN,
ure out the mater for themselves. Judge
Knowles overriled this objection. and
held that the government could pre-.
ssent the testimony through the book
Keeper, He quoted case where q
statement OF the kind prepared by an
expert was allowed To be read 10 tho
Jury, Though the expert was not present
Ihss defense took an exception TO thl,
rufng.
Ihe government then proceeded tC
SHOW by Witness Burns that Hanks had
started his account with the bank by
"a credit OF $4,000 I'm cash and his note
Tor $4,000. All this was checked out al
once, and the overdrafts began The
entries In the books were then called
ior by one. as needed. To show how the
alleged Indebtedness OF S25,277.33 Rc.
cumulated on Dec. I. 1880. when the
0verdrafts had grown considerably
Hanks gave his note for $4,000. which
was renewed several times on Feb g.
1891, IL was reduced by 81 900 paid on ac-
count and the remaining 1000 renewed
from time 10 time until Dec 20, 1892
Then 1880 of IL was paid by a note OF
w. ID. Benson. The other 81. 500 was un-
paid when Hanks account at the banE
was closed, The government also at.
was never paid. but Judge Knowles re.
sponded to an objection OF the defense
by saying he would think the matter
over.
From May /. 1891, Till Dec. 22. 1892, the
account OF Hanks was traced in the
daily balance book 10 show that on the
Natter date he had an overdraft of some.
Thing like $1,000. Then he put In his
note for $4,000. This note was not paid
at the time the bank closed.
Assistant District Attorney Shelton
for the government, then started in e
show whore another $500 Of the indebt
edness came in, The books showed
that Weston Fullerton. who was asso
clated with Hanks In business, gave hi
note for $1,000; that IL was reduced b,
$1,000, and the remaining $500 renewed
from time to time by Fullerton. anC
finally on May 20. 1898. by Hanks.
IL was slow process. but when Mr.
Shelton was through with the matter
he had made Hanks Indebtedness t
the bank on July 10. 1893. when his ac
count was closed, $25. .227 80, made up al
follows: Overdraft 81, ,22I33, Benson not,
Sc 500, Hanks note $1,000. and Fullerton
note $500. The government started n
10 trace the $4,000 note put In by Hanks
the day the bank started. IL was re
duced from time to time until Il go
down to $500. The latter sum was re
moved by a note Of Vie l.. Hanks. wife
of the defendant, and indorsed by him
When II had been reduced to $500 u
was paid by q note of w. ID. Benson, In
dorsed by VIII Hanks. Testimony or
this point was objected TO and ruled OUT
In order to establish where the bull
OF the money represented by overdraft'
went 10, Mr.. Shelton introduced checks
drawn on the bank by Hanks. The frs
was for SSl5. drawn June 30. 1892, II
favor Of w. d. Connors. Col Sanders
objected TO this lie said the check wa!
merely an order on the bank. which tn
bank might honor or not ns II saw ut
and II was not shown that Hanks go
any money on II. Judge Knowles, how
ever thought that such construction
would enable an officer OF bank TO ge
around the law by giving his cheC k
10 another and thus Withdrawing tht
funds. He overluled the objection an1
an exception was taken. Witness Burn
then referred 10 the books and said the,
showed that the check went to pay In
terest on Hanks note. and the amoun
was added to the then existing over
draft.
There was no money paid out" I'm
terposed Col. Sanders. 1T was slmpl!
matter OF accounting"
"Tt was a peculiar kind of account
Ing" was the rejoiner OF Mr.. Shelton. az
he handed the check 10 the stenogra
pher to be marked for Identification.
Two more checks, onp Of July II, 1892
and the other OF Oct. IA. 1892, and eacl
for $685., were produced. They wcr,
given TO the Merchants bank. OF thii
city In payment Of interest on Hanks
note Of Sl2.5OO there. and were indorse,
by Aaron Hershtield, cashier, as cred
ited to the Merchants. Of Great Falls.
When court adjourned for the da!
Mr.. Shelton stlll had some checks h
wanted explained TO the jury.
Delicious ripe strawberries at Il. c
Whllace's.
sFsN.4 L.. l.a. IL