The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1896-05-21

the guilty party. About the $4,000
item he said that he had given Mr..
Huntington credit for the $1,000, and
charged up the bills discount against
G. D. Thompson for $1,000, note
never given; he said that when the A.
Neale note of 1920 was paid he kept
the money without crediting it on the
book. This was paid on May IL, 1898.
In the matter of a $3.50 draft drawn
by John Cumming he kept the money
paid on the draft; this was on Nov. l,
1884," The latter item was objected
to because it occurred six months af-
ter March l, 1898, the time stated in
the Indictment and Judge Webber
ordered the item struck out.
Regarding the $1,000 item Mr.. Phil
brick stated that Turrell told him
that the amount was given for Mr..
Dunnington's interest in the opera
house block purchased by G. Fred
Thompson and Turrell. The witness
said that he did not know whether o.
B. Turrell was in the bank during
March 1898.
A later conversation with the de-
fendant occurred at Board meeting
in the bank after he had resigned as
assistant cashier. The Board made no
promises or threats to or against the
defendant, although he could not
recollect about the threats, nor any
thing said about a criminal liability.
"Mr. Turrell explained at the Board
meeting about the same as he did to
me privately regarding the Neale and
Dunnington transactions"
The State here attempted to show
the money to the credit of the defend
ant during these transactions. The
attempt was objected to and sustained.
On cross-examination by Judge
Baldwin it was brought out that the
examining committee of the bank, &C.
cording to the witness recollection,
never held a meeting during 1892 and
up to late in 1898. Mr.. Philbrick said
that he inspected the books frequently
in '92-'93, but never discovered a
shortage until later, although there
might have been during and prior to
1892. He never went through the
books in 1892 and made up list of
bills receivable and discounts, to his
recollection. Such a list was made in
July '93. however, by the cashier. He
did not know whether the committee
had made an Investigation; in fact,
he did not know of any report being
made prior to 1895. In June '93, when
the bank was under a cloud, the wit
ness did not observe a general short
age in the bank. The assets we're
satisfactory at that time.
The witness was asked whether it
was not fact that R. A. Turrell was
authorized to make loans during the
first portion of 1898, when O. B. Tur-
rell was member of the legislature
He could not remember. He took the
discount and loan book and showed
that R. A. Turrell had made several
loans and accepted large number OF
discounts on behalf of the bank dur.
ing January, February and March
These loans amounted to $25, ,315 and
credits $3O,327 in January, $l5,456,
and credits $16,567 in February
$ll ,l55 and credits $1O,433 in March
These credits were bills receivable OF
notes renewed. Mr.. Philbrick con
tended that the employees of the bank
we're acting without any special au
thority from the directors in making
these loans and discounts. He de-
clared that he was incapable of going
through the bank and making up a
complete statement of the bank be-
cause there were SO many notes that
represented nothing. Aside from the
shortage in notes amounting to over
$1,000 the witness stated that there
was shortage of between $1,000 and
81, 900 in cash items.
The first suspicion that the witness
had of R. A. Turrell having done
wrong was at meeting in Judge
Bowers office in February, 1895.
Here the noon recess was taken.
In the afternoon Mr.. Philbrick stat
ed that Turrell could not explain how
he paid Mr.. Dunnington So 900 on the
building, when the price stipulated,
over the mortgage, swas only $3.50.
WHa simn1v conldn't ov olain - said tho