Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-02-01
MOTION OVERRULED
Judge Cole Imposes Sentence on Elverton
R. Chapman.
Fined 800 and imprisonment for
Thirty Days Ruling of the
COurt-Appeal Noted.

Judge Cole today overruled the motion of
eral days ago of refusing to answer GER
tain questions asked him by the Senate
ST gar trust investigating committee for a
new trial and in arrest of Judgment. Mr..
Chapman was thereupon. sentenced to thir-
ty days in Jail and to pay a fine of $1OO,
the lowest penalty allowed by law Notice
of an appeal to the Court of Appeals was
Immediately given by Mr.. Chapman, and
he Was admitted to bail in the sum of 81 900
to await the disposition of his appeal by
the appellate court.
Ihe motions were very briefly argued by
Messrs. Shellabarger and Wilson, on be-
half of Mr.. Chapman, Assistant District
Attorney Tagsart as briefly replying on
Dehdf or the government. But two of the
many grounds urged In behalf of the mo-
tonS We're argued, the others having al
ready been passed upon by Judge Cole ad-
Versely during the trial. First, Mr. Chap
mans counsel contended that the court
had erred in telling the jury that it was
sufficient for them to believe, in order 10
convict, that the questions mentioned in
the indictment We're substantially those Mr.
chapman declined to answer. In the sec
ond place, they conterded that Mr.. Chap
man should have been allowed to show to
the jury that he did not willfully refuse to
aesWer the questions.
a Single Offense.
Judge Cole said, in disposing of the mo
tlohs, that the questions asked Mr.. Chap
man were not required to be more than SUBJ
stantlally set forth in the Indictments They
We're, OF course, not written instruments,
but mere words of mouth. OF course, IL the
Indictment failed to set forth the questions
asked Mr.. Chapman, with such substantial
precision as to neglect to show clearly the
offease with which he stood charged and
thereby allow him to make complete de-
Tense in the event of future prosecution II
would be fatally defective. and his convic-
ton could not, therefore, be sustained But
II seemed to him, said Judge Cole, that Mr..
chapman was called to testify as to 4 GER
tain thing. He refused and the refusal
amounted to but single offense, and in
view of his present conviction, no otter
future indictment could be maintained
against him.
He had, said the court, told the Jury. in
response to their inquiry, that II they be-
i.eVed Mr.. Cha pmar when he stated that the
questions he refused TO answer were sub
stantially these mentioned in the indict-
ment, they would be warranted in returning
verdict or guilty: Believing that no in
JuStlce mad therein been done Mr., Chapman,
ana that the statute alleged to have been
violated does not require the questions to be
exactly stated in the Indictment but only
tEe tenor of them, Judge Cole said he was
convinced that he had committed no error
And he also believed that he had correctly
refused 10 allow Mr.. Chapman to show that
he had Lot Nillfully refused to answer the
questions. Therefore. he would overrule
10th motions. s~-.
The judge thereupon sentenced MIR. Chap
man to- thirty days iInpris on rrent in tho
District Jail and to pay fine of $lo0 'eX-
planning that while the law required him to
impose both fine and imprisonment he had
imposed the lowest penalty. because he be-
ieVed that he had acted in perfect good
faith in the matter.