Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1896-03-18

-tanti Il evidence. Criminals 10 not
work in OMEN daylight, they work IN
the ni.ht and avoid their fellow man.
Only orc case in Il hundred is proven
by direct testimony. But there is no
testimony so valuable and direct and
irrAsi-table circu nst tnti1l evidence
nor so valuable a. the endless chain
of small facts that is better than the
faulty memory of men. Ii is these
little facts, aided by your common
sense, thai find the guilty man. The
speaker then showed how the killing
of Blanche Lamont had been proven
bv circunstantial evidence and like
the evidence in the Jones case. No
human being saw the act, hut the
circumstances proved it, and convic-
ton followed.
We present to you a chain of facts
with not a link broken that will con-
vince yon of the guilt Of the accused.
Tn" links Of the chain We're reviewed
hr the attorney As follows.
The shortage Of s75,547 in the re- :
fin"ry department.
Its occurrence during Jones term.
The c~oncealrnent Of the theft by the
substitute of bogus melts.
The substitution in silver OF the eX-
act weight distracted in gold.
The m%utilation of the books md r.
cord-.
The IMPOSSIBLE of anyone having
made the bogus melt but the meter
and refner or his assistant.
No one else had a cess TO the vault
or the books II the molter and re-
liner or his assistant.
The speaker would accept the prop
osition a. laid down by the defense
that either Hirsch Harris or John
Jones stole the gold 1t was not the
result Of accident or bad management
but plain simple theft. If it had been
, the result Of accident or incompetencv
it would not have been necessary 10
| substitute bogus melts or destroy the
; records. The defendant came to this
city poor and in debt Hn had full
l charge of ell the operations OF the r.
l fineTv and in a yea or two on a salary
of $500 or $4,000 a year suddenly be
. came a man of wealth, with money to
waste and s~quander, living far be
vond his means, and this sudden
! wealth he didn't even deign to explain
10 the Jury.
q \ he sat upon that witness stHn'
e tha ut prominently drawn out, Ii
makes no explanation his lips are
n sealed. Do you think that if he had
: any cXrusa u explain his rise from
q poverty t. riches, that he would have
z overlooked it. with all his friends
a anxious II have he promised expla-
nation come? The defendant had
Ct made no explanation and the learned
and eloquent counsel had not made
anv.
Mr.. NJ sou invented manv of the
processes in the mint. He swOre that
q nothing could be lost in the sulphurit
d acid treatment and there is no test
mOny to show that anyone lost. The
wear preceding the defendants advent
in the mint there wes a surplus not {
d loas. When the defendant assumed
charge of the department the losses
began.
Heney has been sen to jail for som,
-, of the mint thefts. There were Others
~ in the mint banded together no doubt
but [ am amazed that counsel shoulc
= bring that fact forward to excne,
Jones. He left the mint in June, SO
NJ yet these losses did not appear in tn,
10 settlement. Jones detected the loss AM
,t covered it with a spurious melt. Wer
he innocent would he have covere
10 that loss of $4,000? He did not do a
W Mr.. Harris did. report it t. his super
", ior officer. he was short himself an,
III he did not dare to expose Heney, so h
conceived the theft of his subordinate
There were thieves in high places i
Ia the mint at that time II this thei
Of Heney's had not been covered u
10 the Government would have invest
,, gated. No invest cation was wante
r. at that time. That circumstance alon
demonstrates the guilt Of the defend
q dul. 1uS DOohS themselves III the II
~ finery showed in the fiscal year Of g
a deficiency of over $40 DOC. The alto.
- ney read from the records Of the TEL
!, timony to show that the shortage i
.1u QUESTION existed, one year befol
Hirsch Harris came to the mint.
"a The attorney then dashed the d.
No Continued on first fage.)
at