Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1895-11-22
A DULL DAY
WITNESSES WRESTLE WITH
ACCOUNTS.
Mason and Eirod Disagree on
Figures,

in the morning and described the way
the work was done in the Refinery.
Defendant assisted in the operations
Of the furnace. but Mr.. Pierce did most
Of the work. Mr. Heney's lunch WAS
generally brought to him by someone
on the outside. generally his mother
in-law. Mr.. Hetey seldom remained
after working hours. Defendant and
Mr.. Pierce used jointly u Of the lock
ers in the cupcl Dom. Mr. H"nov !
owing to the Dature OF the work ed
not battle as often as the others. FL g.
sink in the Refinery had q separ#t
outlet. Sometimes found granul"r d
gold on the floor under the boiling
pots.
Witness mopped the floor person
ally. Saw MI. Bradley washing the
m0ps in the sulphuric tanks and Ii
kens cautioned him against doing it.
Mr.. Heney lived directly in the rear II
the Mint. Cola taken directly from
the sulphuric hath would burn d mans
pocket. 1t might not burn q wo"Ien
pocket, but it would a cotton pocket.
After it had been out or the bath a few
days it would not burn anything.
Could be at anytime removed in q
bucket or phial Witness further de
! scribed the operations OF the tanks
that led to the sewers.
THE SHOE BAR AGAIN.
Warren NOteware testified that the
shoe bar in evidence had on II S 574,
and that this number indicated that it
had passed through the "a settlement.
In order to answer other questions the
witness was obliged to go to the Mint
and get his books.
Meanwhile Phil Doyle was recalled
and testified that the bars which the
No. 4 in the number was SUI ,ier than
the other figures, showing tat it be
longed to another set % numbers.
Witness had examines Ter 400 bars
and in no instance was d small figure
4 used prior to 1894. Mr.. Galush;
Pad also examined the shoe bars with
Doyle. He swore that three bars had
.aen cast in one mould. This was a
contradiction Of Doyie's testimony,
but the witness afterwards corrected
his testimony, and said that only one
had been cast.
Lawrence Elrod recalled He read
l from the books to show that in '9s
there was a full settlement between
the Meter & Refiner and the Supt.
except a shortage Of SO ounces. Ia
. briskie was Meter & Refiner and go
! a full receipt for his settlement. Book
Y also showed a clear settlement in "a
9 Books to date show clean settlements
whats all this testimony for?'
asked the Counsel for the Govern
ment.
Coffin: We want to show that tn
:. books show no shortage.
Clark: We have always admitte'
that the books balanced.
y The Court: That my understand
ing. This testimony is superfuous
The books balance as I understand
: They claim no shortage in the book
but in the bars.
% Coffin, however, insisted and the e1
RI animation Of ElrOd went on.
40 Refinery records from 1888 show
/ shortage of 2.476 ounces. Fiscal yea
1890 show a surplus in the refinery c
500 ounces. There was some dispe
u sion to smile, during the testimony {
IL the witness and CoffiE remarked:
le you can smile all you please, 70
y you are trying to send a man toState
1t Prison on a false showing, and I don
propose to see it done"
J. The Court: There is no controvers
on these books.
st Clark: Not the slightest.
Coffin: Then you admit no shor
J. age.
Clark. Hardly, but we admit tt
-. books don't show a shortage.
Tie Court: Go on. Go on.
Witness had weighed the bars an
passed them in '92, but his only bus
y ness was t o look at the stamp G
them.
Coffin tried to get out Of the witne'
that he would have known that it W.
not a gold bar at sight as he won.
,ir have passed had it not been a go
lie bar, t buhaving already testified tn
r he was only looking FOR figures on Il
Sc bar, the question was ruled out.
i'll Recess until / 30.
III AFTER RECESS.
Gent Clarke cross examined Mr.. /
an rod. From 1882 until 1894, inclusiy
to the books indicated a loss of from )
} ounces all the way up to 500 ounc
In 1895 there was an excess OF 81
20. 1nn,1,tin rr IL n,ror lnn0'nu nc