The herald., 1896-09-18
the Farmers ana Merchants bank and
ask them"

the Farmers ana Merchants bank and
ask them"
CHASING AN OPTION.
Interest next centered on the option
which witness stated he had written
| on the back of one Of doc" Green's
receipts. He said he had given 1t to
Spilman when the option expired. Mr..
Williams turned to Spilman and asked
him If he had 1t. The defendant said
he didn't know, 1t might be among his
| papers, But the assistant district at
torney thought that Nichols and not
Warren had written the option, and
| ing counesl and their client grinned at
Mr.. Williams anxiety, and the court
| remarked that he didn't know why
| Spilman should keep the returned op-
| ton, as 1t was of no value whatever.
Mr.. Williams thought otherwise. and
! said he'd have out q subpoena for 1t.
Then Mr.. Meserve tried to cast oil on
the troubled waters by saying that Mr..
| Spilman would look through his papers
and bring the option, II he still had It,
into court. But" added counsel In a
mildly sarcastic way. there is no pro-
cess on Gods earth that can compel
man to bring anything into court that
tends against himself" After this lit
tie interchange of civilities the witness
resumed his narrative.
81 told Spilman& said he, that 1
would be good for the money Nichols
owed, and I went to the Farmers and
Merchants bank and drew, think,
check for 500 and made up the other
500 from my pocket. Nichols a couple
of days or so later gave me q check for
the amount, but when took II to the
bank found his money hadn't arrived.
Later he paid me back the money. No;
don't think there was anything queer
IN m n hoH
him money before and have since.
When doc" Green wanted to borrow
$500 from Nichols I was in the front
room of the office. Nichols called me and
told me about it and said, Yes. I'd
indorse GREEN'S note, and after asking
piled three months, I did indorse it,"
MONEY ALWAYS A GODsEND.
When the defendant went upon the
stand he told an apparently simple and
straightforward story as to how Mich
OILS had taken the stock and Warren an
option on a block of stock In Green's
office. Also, how Nichols had at Pasa-
dena interviewed the various parties
whose names had been mentioned as
probable hackers of the scheme, and
how he had accompanied witness to
inspect the water lands at West Glen
dale.
On cross-examination witness stated
that he didn't know or meet Allen until
after he had been arrested. He never
had told anyone, ladies or others, that
there was money in the banks to the
credit Of the corporation. On the con-
trary, 1t was well-known fact that
personally he had no money. Neither
Markham or Green paid any money in
or gave any written contract of any
kind.
How much money have you paid on
he Df01n orlc a%,a r..
Williams.
Nothing" was the reply.
land?" ~.
ooo."
How did you expend that much
There are two bored wells, three dug
wells on the upland and four wells in the
willows. The value Of the thing lay,
however, in the discovery that the land
lay in such an elevated position that by
running tunnel in the side large body
of water could be tapped"
How much money was paid in before
Mr.. Nihols had paid for his stock?"
He was the first man to pay up for
stock. He and Doc Green paid the same
day." CO
''How did you come to take warren's
fore?"
Il wasn't anxious about It; had $500
| in greenbacks and q note for $500, so
| was fully secured"
Then what made you take that $4,000"
| WELL" answered witness, while a
smile overspread his face, Il always
| take money when it is offered to me-"
Witness proceeded to state that he
didn't bank the money, but just packed
| it away in his inside pocket.
Els that the way you carried your
money!" curiously inquired Mr.. WILL
Jams.
Eyes, when had any," added witness
as an afterthought.
"You didn't trust the banks, eh?"
II didn't put it in the bank because
I'd have to pull it out again too quick to
pay my debts"
That concluded the bulk of the testi-
mony and Justice Young gave ruling
in the following words: ,
THE COURTS REVIEW.
"It is evident that this man operated
with the $500 and that is the amount
of purchased stock. The question Is
whether Spilman at the time he sold the
stock, intended to deceive and sell some
thing that was worthless, or property of
| less value than he claimed it was;
whether he intended to take advantage
| of Mr.. Nichols-as the law puts 1t.
1.-THE contract was made between
| these two men with the assistance of
Green and Warren and evidently for
| this stock. The prosecuting witness
| himself, said he was not to have deliv-
| cry of the stock until ten days later. He
| does not assign any reason for this but
stated it as fact. He had ten days dur
| ing which he could make investigation
| 1t was certainly for the purpose of CIV
| ing him the right to rescind the contract
| If he saw fit. He had an option and his
| duty would have been, If not satisfied
| to have offered to rescind the contract
| and take the necessary steps to recover
the money at that time.
/. 10 is evident that when Mr. Nichols
| returned to this city he entered into a
| further arrangement for another pur-
chase after having had the opportunity
| to investigate to the fullest extent. In
stead of resembling the contract he en-
| tered deliberately into another contract
with these people. It appears to the
| court that Mr.. Nichols did not, at that
| time, think he was being swindled or
| had been taken advantage Of, for there
was no necessity for his entering into a
subsequent contract, and there is no
| evidence to show that he intended to
| surrender the first contract.
1.-THE burden of proof clearly lies with
the people to show by preponderance
Of evidence--and the defendant is enti-
7! tied to the doubt-that these men took
| advantage of the prosecuting witness and
| tried to take his money from him by
| false representations. 1 think the proof
| has been the other way. 1 think Mr..
| Spilman, whether rightfully or not, hon