The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1895-02-08
Did the Defendant Swear to a False
Statement?
VALUE CLAIMED FOR THE CHECKS.
Trying to Prove That the $500. 900 on
Paper Was Part of tile Legiti.
mate Assets.

Mr.. LlvernaSh announced that he wa;
ready to proceed, and he at once com.
menced his opening statement to the jury
outlining the defense which he expects t.
make.
Livernash spoke first of the attestation
of the bank statement by Notary Tharp
The defense would prove, he said, thai
Tharp never administered an oath to the
defendant, but that he went through the
| formality usual in such cases-that is, he
affixed his seal and signature without put
ting Mcdonald to the trouble of coming to
his Office, and without taking the trouble to
go to the bank himself. Tharp's general
rule was to affix his seal and signature
at his Office. and later, at his own con-
venience, to go to the bank and hand in
| the verified document hims elf, but not to
actually dminister an oath. There was
no oath administered on the day the state
ment was sealed and signed by the notary
the defense could prove. and as there had
been no oath it was plain no per jury could
have been committed.
AS to Columbus WAREHOUSES; testimony
Liyernash said he expected to prove the
witness had not told the whole truth. Nc
Donald did not talk business over the
counter of the bank, and he would show
the jury that the conversation Waterhouse
said he had with Mcdonald was not
noticed by any one of the clerks of the
bank. Warehouse and Frank Mcdonald
were on very friendly terms, but not so
with Dick. Between Dick and himself
there had always been graf deal of bitter
ness, and when the opportunity came it
was natural to suppose Wat erhouse would
shield the one and try to expose the other.
AS to the four checks the defense would
show there was nothing discreditable nor
criminal about them ''At that time"
said Livernash, "Mr. Eastland was sent
East to float certain bonds He had al
ready received an offer of 100000 for them,
but there was considerable opposition to the
sale, as it was supposed by holding the
bonds better bargain could be made.
Mr. II. Sherman opposed the sale more
strongly than any one else, and Frank Nc
Donald said if the bank could not have the
money for the bonds it had to have its
equivalent, as it was imperative that more
cash should be in the bank to pay depos-
itors. 1t was then that Sherman said he
would help out by depositing his check.
He was followed by Dorm, Waterhouse and
Frank Mcdonald. These checks were not
all in one. They were made up of numer-
Gus small checks, the idea being that they
required.
They had legitimate place among the
assets of the bank, as they were held as
security for the promises given. They
took the place of money, which could be
secured at any time by sale of the bonds
as the offer was actually made"
Livernash then took up the insanity line
of defense. He said he could show that
Dick Mcdonald had come from race in
which insanity, perhaps in an incipient
form, was the rule. He did not mean to
state that the defendant was a driveling
idiot, but he did mean to say that he was
mentally unbalanced. He would show
that he was surrounded by the riff-raff of
the financial world, whose only object in
counting his acquaintance was to lead him
on for their own profit He would show,
too, that while the defendant was man of
magnificent fertility at evolving schemes
he had absolutely no power to carry them
out. Livernash hoped to prove that there
had been no perjury because there had |
been no oath, and failing that he hoped to !
man mentally incapable of setting himself |
right when once led from his path. He |
asked verdict of acquittal.
w. s. Morse, an accountant in the Pacific |
Bank, was the first witness called for the |
defense. Questioned as to the events of |
December 81 1892, he denied having heard |
of the big checks submitted on that day,
usual he would have heard of them had I
checks of that size been presented He re-
membered that Waterhouse bad made de-
posts on that day amounting in all to
100000 or over, but whether they were in
cash, checks or securities he did not know
In the cross-eXamination Mr.. Barnes at
tempted to go into the details OF all the
checks, but an objection from Livernash
stopped him. The witness was then led |
on to tell of the method of handling checks
in the Pacific Bank. All checks which
came to the bank late on December 81, 1892,
were listed January 3, 1898, the next work
ing day. They had not been cashed on
checks taken on December 81 nor were
they cashed on January 4. The reason for
this was that Mr.. Bellermann, the head ac-
countant, had given him the checks and
had told him that they were to be held
under the orders of Mr.. Mcdonald.
A bundle of checks was handed to the
witness and he was asked to identify them.
This came easily to him, as guessing their
purpose when they were first placed in his
hands he had pinned them together and
had treated them as one item equal to
their total amount, instead of separately
as he would have done in another case.
What the nature of his guess as to their
purpose was, however, he was not allowed
to state. A check drawn bv Waterhouse
& Lester on the Pacific Bank was then
shown the witness, and he identified il as
one for 100000 drawn to offset the checks
which he had been holding. The Pacific
Bank chetks were never paid; they were
merely for the purpose of taking up the
checks deposited.
On redirect examination Morse declared
ne knew nothing about the checks from
lis own knowledge. Mr. Bellerman had
old him Mr.. Mcdonald wanted the checks
leld, but which Mcdonald had given the
order he had not been informed.
The defense then called A. X. Dewing.
mother employe of the Pacific Bank. His
place In the bank was only few feet away
rom the note-teller's desk, where, if ever
re talked across the counter at all, Nc ]
Donald used to converse, but he did not
emember any conversation of half an
hours length on December 81 1892, be-
ween Mcdonald and any one. AS to the
Ittestatlon of papers the witness had FREE .
Iuently seen Tharp, the notary, come into
he, bank, but he had never seen him ac- i
ually administer an OATH
a. L.. jenkins, another clerk of the bank, a
vas the third witness. He was shown the
nnual statement of the Pacific Bank, and
le Identified it as one he had taken to 1
harp to be attested. Tharp affixed his
nd ofkx J. rndi