The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-12-07
ASK FOR IT
TO SAVE THE COFFINS
MIR. MILLER MAKES A STRONG ARGu-
MENT AT WASHINGTON.
He Points Out Errors i'm the In6ict-
ments and Tells the Supreme JUST
ices that the Trial Judge Erred.
special to the Indianapolls journal.

Special TO the indianapolis Journal
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6.-Argument was
begun before the Supreme Court this after
noon in the Coffin case. Ex-Attorney-gen-
eral Miller and Mr.. Ferdinand Winter ap-
peared for the Collins and Assistant Attor-
ney-general Holmes Conrad appeared for
the government. Mr.. Miller made the OPEN
ing argument He contended that there
were no facts set forth in the counts of the
indictment on which the defendants were
convicted showing that any relation ex-
listed between the defendants and President
Haughey. of the Indianapolis National
Bank, or even between defendants and the
Indianapolis Cabinet Company. 1t was not
alleged that defendants knew Haughey to
be president of the Indianapolis National
Bank rlor is it asserted in the indictment
that the money alleged to be niisapplied
was converted to the use OF anyone; nor
is there any allegation as to the value of
pound sterling in United States currency,
or any showing that the Indianapolis Cabi-
net Company the Indianapolis Desk
Company, whose drafts were alleged to
have been discounted. was insolvent. or any
showing that the money paid on the draft
was In fact lost. Mr.. Miller further held
that the court erred in rulings during the
introduction of much of the testimony of
Mr.. Hawkins, the receiver of the bank
Mr.. Miller also contended that certain COM
ments made by the Judge during the intro
duction of testimony practically character
lied the defendants as Criminals"
Mr.. Miller displayed considerable feeling
in his comments on the treatment accorded
the lawyers for the defendants by the low
er court. He especially dwelt at length on
the refusal of the trial judge to instruct the
jury that the law presumes a prisoner to
be innocent until he is proven guilty, and
that the presumption of his innocence must
stand until he is proved guilty beyond any
reasonable doubt. On the contrary the
judge charged the jury that it must de-
termine the guilt or the innocence of the
prisoners by looking at the proofs and only
the proofs. Mr.. Miller also contended in
this connection that the court erred in de-
manding any proof OF defendants as to the
legality of any Of their actions. He cited
numerous authorities showing that the
burden of the proof is never shifted to the
defendants. as to any fact constituting an
ingredient of the offense charged. He also
stated, in reply to question of Justice
Gray, that the exceptions taken of the re-
fusal ofthe court to otherwise instruct the
jury on this point had been properly re-
served. and that the language of the court
in this instruction could not be regarded
as a mere verbal error. Mr.. Miller invited
the attention of the bench to the record of
the entire case which. he said, would plain
iy show the difficulties which the counsel
for the defendants had experienced in get
ting the case before the Supreme Court.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Miller's argu-
ment, Mr.. Conrad began bis reply for the
government. He did not enter fully on a
reply 10 the points advanced by Mr.. Miller,
but will conclude tomorrow. He will be
followed by Mr.. Winter.
Messrs. Miller and Winter will leave for
New York Immediately after the conclu-
sion OF the case in the Supreme Court.