The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-07-22
the disclosure was taken before Re
fierce ffillman.

the disclosure was taken before Re
fierce Hillman.
MI Countryman was asked what
Mr. Bickei testified to before Referee
Hillman IN response to the question
tie witness was allowed to answer
over the objection Of the defense. Mr..
Countryman proceeded to relate what
he could remember of Mr.. BickePs tes-
timOny. He said that Mr.. Bickel testi-
fed that he was vice president of the
Minnesota Savings bank; that e. J.
Lucius had money in the bank on Nov.
9, 1885, the Gay before the summons
was served, amounting to $l,940.58, but
that Lucius had no money in the Min
Ee5Ota Savings bank on Nov. 10. Mr..
Bickel further testified. according to
the recollection of the witness, that
Lucius ordered the money out of the
bank on-the afternoon of Nov. g. some
time after the bank had closed for the
day, and that he, Bickel, paid Lucius
the ST. SAC in cash, and that Lucius took
the money away and brought none of
1t back to the bank.
The defense again objected, and
moved to strike out the latter part of
Countryman's testimony as not being
feVelant, or material, as the indict-
ment did not contain any charge rela-
tive to Mr.. Lucius not bringing the
money back. The motion of the de-
Iense was granted and that portion Of
witness testimony stricken out
Mr.. Countryman testified that he
asked Mr., Bickel whether the money
was left in the bank and that Mr.
Blckel replied that it was not.
Ana you say so now, don't you?"
remarked Attorney Barnard, soto voce.
p IGphlng around and addressing Mr.
On cross eXamination, Mr.. Country
man admitted. that he had dismissed
the action of the ST. Paul Fire Brick
company against Lucius and the other
two defendants. Witness also admitted
that when Mr.. Bickel arrived to testify
before Referee Hillman, he (the wit
ness) had not said a word to Mr.. Biclla1
regarding Hillman having omitted TO
take an oath, or concerning the fact
that the court had not signed a formal
order appointing a referee.
MIR. Mcdonald asked the witness
whether Mr.. Bickel had had an oppor
tunity to learn the facts. The witness
S salu ne dld have an opportunity to
learn the facts by asking questions,
Mr. Countryman said that his testi-
mony regarding Mr. BickePs evidence
before Referee Hillman was founded
on his recollection, which may have
peen refreshed by reading the referees
report.
Mr.. Mcdonald sharply cross-ouestion-
ed the witness, with a view to show
ing that he entertained an animus
against Mr.. Bickel, and was ''trotting
over to the county attorneys office
and consulting with the assistant coun-
ty attorney.
MIR. Countryman, in reply to Mr.. Nc
Donald,s question, said that he was in
tereSted only in seeing justice done.
Mr. Countryman, didn't you tell
me yesterday in the county attorneys
office that you wanted to see Mr.
Bickel convicted?" asked Mr.. McDon-
aid.
Mr.. Countryman replied: Eyes, sir,
L did, and l certainly do"
At the conclusion of Mr. Country
mans testimony, Mr. Mcdonald moved
to strike it all out. The motion was de-
MED.
The state called Attorney L. D. Bar
nard to the stand to identify the pa
pers in the garnishment proceedings
Inc assistant county attorney then
| read that portion of Referee Hillman's
report, including Mr.. Bickel's testimo-
ny with regard to the withdrawal by
Mr.. Lucius of the $1,940 on deposit in
the Minnesota Savings bank The ref
eree's report was in substance the
same as Mr.. Countryman's recollection
OF the testimony of Mr. BickeI
The next witness for the state proved
to be Edward ]. Lucius, the individual
whose money, Mr.. .Bickel Swears. was
Withdrawn from the Minnesota Saw
| 1ngs bank before the garnishee papers
were served. His testimony claimed
! the closest attention.
Mr.. Lucius," inquired the assistant
county attorney, did you on the 9Th
day of last November have money on
! deposit with the Minnesota Savings
| bank?"
Yes, sir"
How much?"
81 had $1,94O.5O there"
''How long had it been on deposit
there?"
about year"
Mr.. Lucius remembered that he had
been served with some papers on Nov
9th or Nov. 10th, 1896, he couldn't re-
collect which date, and that he had
given the papers to somebody at the
Minnesota savings bank, either to Mr.
Bickel or Barnard.
Mr.. Lucius saw Mr.. B. a day or two
after the papers were served on him.
He, Lucius, had been sent for, and had
gone to the bank. On arriving there
he saw Mr.. Bickel.
"Mr. Bickel,' continued the witness
asked me if I knew my account was
garnisheed. 1 said did. He told me it
was a pretty bad thing, and asked me
II had shown ANYBODY nv hank hook