The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-05-11

quentiy argued against this ruling. and
Mr. Smith was given rap by Mr. Ham
ilton, who chided him with being one or
three Commemorative attorneys against
the prisoner rcnarking that the state
was well represented. This brought
Commemorative Attorney Goodwin 10
his feet, who stated that he had been
asked TO assist I'm the prosecution after
the party had arrived at Emporia. inc
fact that the prisoner had been refused
bail by several other judges, accounted
for his presence I'm the case. Had the
case been carried before Judge Wickham,
OF Hcnrico county. the second time,
which was certainly the proper place ior
such proceedings. he would not be assoc
ciatcd with Messrs Sands and Smith.
But since the matter had been brought
away down ia Greenesyille county, ne
had agreed to Join the other gentlemen
in tho prosecution.
WOULD BAIL HIM ANYHOW.
After some further discussion. Judge
Harhdm gave the prosecution "A dow
from which they did not recover during
the rest Of the proceedings. Counsel Tor
the prosecution were evidently Devil
dered. The thing came Unexpectedly. Mr.
Smith sank back in his chair and looked
dazed, while Mr. Sands submitted pas
sivcly for a time. and then appeared 70
be al loss what 10 think. Mr.. GOODWIN
smiled, and glanced around TO catch the
Silence rcigned supreme for fully two
minutes during which time the face OF
the prisoner beamed nOticeably.
Judge Barham had remarked during a
pause: "The Court decides that charge
OF grand larceny is bailabie, even thoush
there be serious doubts whether the pfls-
Oner will be brought 70 court at the time
appointed for trial"
u undo rstand.' said Mr.. Sands. that
in any case Of grand larceny your Honor
will bail the prisoner, even though you
are sure he Will not appear for trial az
the time appointed, and shat the only
question involved Is that OF the amount
OF bail. Am | rlght?'
you are said Judge Barham.
Then IT was that silence dense as toiu
filled tho courtroom. and the prosecution
put their heads together again.
Finally Mr.. Sands said; we expect to
prove that the prisoner Is guilty OF
crime for which the penalty Is from
two 10 ten years imprisonment. In adj
ditiOn. we can snow that there are requi-
sitons I'm the hands of the Gov
ernor asking for the prisoner in other
States. where he is charged with crimes
for which the punishment would be
the prisoner is worth a large sum Of
money 10y reason Of his operations, and
we understand. incidentally. that ne has
bondsmen who Will furnish bail TO
heavy amount
THE pEFENcE OBJEcgTD.
Mr.. r.. X. 0ltSltlNldls private Ff'-
rotary Of the Governor, took the witness
stand. but counsel for the defence OBJ
iectcd to his testimony In regard 10 the
acquisitions I'm the hands Of the Governor,
upon the ground that witness could not
swear that the prisoner and Frank j..
Smith were one and the same.
After some discussion Mr.. Smith asked
that the evidence be given Tor Whal II
was worth whcreupon quite niue
wrangle arose. amid which dozen or
two ladies filed into court 10 hear the
trial.
Judge Barham stated that the Court
would not consider inc evidence as 10
the acquisitions unless ne thought proper.
Mr.. Chesterman stated that he held
I'm his hand the acquisitions for Frank
L. Smith. but could not identify the
prisoner as the man for whom the requ-
sitions were issued Witness was then
requested TO stand aside. and suDerin-
tendent Crawford, of the Identification
Bureau Of Cincinnati, was put on the
stand and testified 10 his acquaintance
with the prisoner, as recently published
Mr.. Hamilton objected 10 the produc-
ion of evidence that the prisoner had
forfeited ms bail bond on previous &c
casiOnS once for $1,000. and held thdt
If the gOld-brick man had forfeited MS
bail bond ten days ago, such inforina-
ton could not be legal evidence in this
particular case.
read the document setting forth that the
prisoner forfeited his bail bond in Of
tawa. H., 10 the extent OF $1,000. rms
together with the testimony of Mr. Ches-
terman and Mr.. Crawford, was the Only
evidence submitted.
There was a considerable wranele over
the amount of bond 10 be given Mr.
Quarlcs was questioned and replied lhat
he had been authorized by the virginia
Trust COMPANY 10 act in the matter
as he saw fit Judge Barham asked how
much the prisoner Gouhsei c9u ,iu l ue
up. TO which Mr.. Quarles replied ne Was
not prepared TO say. His company had
half "A million dollars capital ana St'''Oo
surplus.
The AMOUNT. $4,000.
After an appeal on the part Of counsel
for the defence TO make the bond HShl
Judge Barham said: "The Court will bail
the prisoner in the amount OF hity
This produced some eager discussion
on the part OF the prisoners counsel.
The Court gave the attorneys until
T. NJ 10 decide upon their agreement or
refusal 10 furnish the amount. and the
Court took a recess until that time. Dur
ing the interim Judge Barham had
conference i'm his Office with the attorneys
on both sides, and the matter was dis
'"WHat have YOU TO say about the
amount Of bail2" asked MrWenden-
burg. of counsel for the defence.
What do think of l itI 81 ne n Iepl ,S;
state debt. and the expenses of the mill
tary at pocahontas. too
some OF those who went down "a En-
porla returned 10 the city on the $50
train last evening. Mossrs Sands. Wen
dcnburg Davis. Hamilton. and Smith. re-
NAMED over TO confer with Judge Bar
ham. The prisoner Sheriff Solomon.
peputy-Sherim Russell. and Mr.. Quarlcs.
also remained IN Emporia, as did Mcssrs.
Emory and one Dumond Smith
RrFUsFD TO RUDUcE THE BAIL.
The following telegram from The
Times correspondent at Emporia was
received last night.
"rhe result OF the Parker case was
refusal of Judge Barham TO reduce the
bail bond The prisoner will be remand
cd TO the HenricO county Jail to-day.