The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-24
MIR. WINTERS ARGUMENT.
He Makes n Strong Showing for the
Defense.

Ferd Winter opened the argument for the
defense SO far the Collins concerned
He began systematic and detailed expla-
nation Of all the transactions against which
the government has charged criminality on
the part OF the defendants. He took up the
indictment count by count. beginning with
the first and sought to show that no money
was lost to the bank through any of the
operations in which the defendants are ac-
cused of acting as aiders and abetters to
Haughey.
His explanation under Count 1 of the In
dictment was the same in each case where
London transactions were made the basis
OF accusations Of crimlnality. This count
OF the indictment charges that upon March
l, 1898. the defendants aided and abetted
Haughey In the misapplication of S, 500. "a,
which was the amount of check drawn
by the cabinet company on that day to
purchase Chicago exchange, the money
to be transmitted through the First Ma
tional Bank of Chicago to London. Mr.
Winter said the evidence showed that not
a penny was lost to the bank by reason of
any of these transactions. which were in
effect but renewals with partial payments
of former drafts. The effect of them was
simply change of credits and there was
loss to the bank On March /, 1s93 the
amount which the defendants are charged
with misapplying, S5,S02.Si, was checked out
Chicago cabled to London to the order OF
Elijah Coffin. Then Mr.. Winter took up
the statement which he had called upon
Mr.: Robinson to prepare during the trial,
and, reading from Ii, showed that previous
to this time the bank had sent forward
this count. and that the draft was about
due. He then traced these drafts as had
been done in the evidence, showing the SUBJ
Of fhA 49,
York correspondent of the Indianapolis
bank and by ii to the defunct bank. This
was shown by the statements prepared by
the different clerks Of the New York banks
which had been introduced In evidence. This
course of argument was followed in all the
counts OF the indictment in which a Lon
don transaction was the basis of the charge
and in those instances where the amount
returned was greater than the amount
sulting in a loss of the amount sent the
transaction resulted In a betternent of
this excess, inasmuch as they had received
That much In payment Of the original draft.
He said the essence of all the counts charas-
ing misapplication was not that Haughey
intended to but that he did misapply
the funds OF the bank. and argued that
tent had been carried into effect The
counts down TO and including count No S
Count No. 8. in addition to a London trans
action, contained another item of 81, 1854
or a Wooten note. The transactions under
their total amount was $5.960.S4 Mr. Win
ter cited evidence introduced showing the
Sep15,ss ss Of that day TO- have been
post all paper against which any question
had =, do been raised and it still left the bank
ing the misapplication of $3,467.23 in paper
Of the American Desk and Seating Com
pany under date of July Ii, 1885, was taken
up.
Mr. Winter then took up the evidence
showing that prior to this time +. w.
Dickerman, president of the company, had
which, in addition to being in payment
Tor sales, was intended as q renewal of
two former notes which the cabinet COM
pany had deposited in the bank. This note
was sent back with instructions to draw
several other notes, giving amounts and
dates, being substantially a refusal to al
low a renewal Of the notes by including
them in the former large note DiclserInan
failed to send back sufficient paper. and
after some delay the cabinet company drew
upon him Tor the entire amount. This
draft which the cabinet company had a
right 10 draw was placed i'm the bank to
take up the Boxer draft and some other
items.
Mr.. Winter argued that the Desk and
Seating company paper was drawn against
shipments and was a better security 10 the
bank than the Boxer draft, which had been
returned with Endorsement mot paid
because not convenient" While speaking
to call attention TO the evidence of Haugh-
ey's refusal on July |, $685. 10 accept de-
post of various paper offered and allow
likewise pay paper that had previously been
sent TO II. j.. Smith, at Seymour. and by
him sent to the Indianapolis bank through
the Seymour bank for collection. Mr.. Win
ter argued that this refusal of Haughey to
accept the whole of the deposit because he
would be required to pay the whole amount
out In cash showed that there was no col
fusion between Haughey and the defend
the pVi1aDca Mr. Vtpfar told tba fhot
he believed were this merely case where
a preponderance of evidence was required
and SIS dollar calf was all there was i'm
dispute they would find verdict for the
defendants
Count No. 10 was then taken up. 1t
charges the misapplication of $3.50 on Feb
Is, 1893. The transaction in this instance
he said, was similar to the London transac-
TONS The effect of ii all was that the
amount was sent to Richmond and note
of the Wooten company was taken up by
New York draft and the money returned
TO the bank, simply resulting in change
Then count No II, charging the misap-
plcation of $3.50. the amount Of pay
roll check drawn on June II. 1898 was re-
showed a total deposit Of S11,20S.0i on that
day, among which was the Boxer draft.
shipped. He thought the character of all
| the deposits made on that day justified the
drawing and payment of the pay roll check.
When the Boxer draft and insurance check
| from Boston were finally paid in Chicago,
| and the money expressed to p. 3. Coffin
| by a brother, Mr. Winter said the evidence
| showed the money went into the cash ac-
count Of the company. and was used in
meeting the pay roll OF the company.
Count No. l., charging the misapplica-
! ton of 81 610.72. on June u, 1893. then
! explained. He said on this date draft on
the American Desk and Seating Company
| for $2.2S2 was deposited. payment of which
was afterwards refused. AT the time the
draft was deposited he said. the amount
was due and its subsequent refusal by the
! Chicago company did not faint them with
| criminality.