The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-09
CHECKS AND
Defense i'm Bank Case Gains Points
i'm ross ExaminatiOn.
Teller Robinson Retires from the Stand
The Defense Refuses to Cross-Ex-
anime Mr.. Hawkins.

The defense in the bank case yesterday
completed the cross-examination of Mr..
Robinson, the receiving teller Of the de-
funct bank. The result of the cross-exami-
nation has been a considerable weakening
of the case Of the government, and now
speculation is running forward to the re-
direct examination of Mr.. Robinson by the
counsel for the government in an attempt
to foretell what the result of the second
examination by the government attorneys
will be. The effort of the defense in the
cross-examination was TO show that no
money had been actually drawn from the
bank upon the large amount OF the cabinet
company's paper that had been shown to
have passed through the bank. In a num-
Der Of instances the defense succeeded In
showing that the amount of deposits ex-
ceeded the amounts of the checks. The de-
Tense is seeking TO show that the paper of
the company simply formed a circle from
the bank through various transactions and
back TO the bank.
During the afternoon session of the court,
when the cro-ss-examination of Mr.. Robin
son was concluded, Judge Baker called
Receiver Hawkins to the stand and directed
the defense to cross-examine him. At the
conclusion OF the testimony In chief Of Mr..
Hawkins the defense desired to cross-ex-
anime him, but the court would not per-
nit 1t because the counsel for the govern
ment thought the defense was attempting
to anticipate the governments evidence
which it intended to introduce through Mr..
Robinson. After the receiver was excused
Mr.. Robinson was called to the stand and
his testimony continued till its completion
in the afternoon.
When the receiver was called to the stand
the lawyers for the defense said they did
not desire TO cross-examine him. and the
court instructed the court photographer to
let the record show the call Of the receiver
by the court and that the defense had de-
clined to c-ross-examine him at that time.
The construction which has been placed
upon the instructions of the court to the
stenographer is that when the defense calls
Receiver Hawkins to the stand for the pur-
pose of cross-examination the court will
refuse to permit it.
John NJ. Tufts, the general manager of the
New York branch, was also called to the
stand. and testified to the facts substantial
ly the same as upon the former trial. Dur
ing the examination of Mr.. Tufts there
was a brief passage at arms between Mr..
Miller, of counsel for the defense, and the
district attorney as to whether the New
York branch was ever indebted to the cabi-
net company under the terms of the con-
tract between the two companies. 1t had
been shown that under this contract the
New York branch was to pay for goods
received from the cabinet company only
after paying the expenses of the business
out of the profits. Mr.. Miller argued that
the New York branch owed the cabinet
company for all goods shipped regardless
of the time when the debt became due, and
that the contract referred to simply had
reference to when the debt became due.
Mr.. Burke contended that the debt was
not a debt unless there were profits sufi-
Gent to pay 1t.