The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-12-09
Art NeedleWOrk.

Nusser To this proceeding, Mr.. Butler
interposed strenuous objections, insist
ing that the state could not offer evil
dence of one crime to prove the com
mission of the substantive and chief
crime alleged.
Mr.. ConIin, Mr. Buffers associate, in
arguing the objection said that in or
der to evade the rule of evidence that
one crime cannot be proved by testl-
mony offered in proof of another crime,
the county attorney had chosen TO can
the whole thing the same transaction.
County Attorney Anderson object
to counsel's repeated accusations that
1 am evading any rule, for am not;
Mr. Observation-Disclosures the
county attorneys denial, L assert aga
that he is trying to evade the rule, and
I shall reiterate the charge every time
he attempts to- Notwithstanding the
county attorneys objection.
The court took a recess at this time,
to give the county attorney an oppor-
tunity to read over the testimony or
MI. Dickson, with d view of ascertain
ing whether it afforded any foundation
for inquiring of Mr.. Sheehan concern
ing the Nusser notes.
After the recess, at the request OF
the county attorney, Mr.. Dickson
testimony was read to the court out
of the hearing of the jury. The tes-
timony failed to disclose enough TO
warrant the state in pursuing the IN
quiry relating to the Nusser notes ana
the county attorney withdrew his
question.
The county attorney offered the gen.
eral credit journal in evidence. 1t was
received, against the objection of Mr..
Butler. The county attorney then Of
fered in evidence the states exhibits
beginning with No. 1O7 These lnclud-
ed all the notes mentioned in the in
dictment and the accompanying credit
bills discount. The first note read by
the county attorney to the jury was
the Sophie Lair note for $3.50. This,
Mr.. Butler moved. be stricken out on
the ground that there was fatal var
lance between the note as read and
the note as set forth in the indict-
ment The variance consisted in the
omission of the two words Ito ma
turity'' from the Indictment. those
words appearing in the note.
The county attorney cOntended that
the variance was not sufficient or sub
stantfal There~was nothing mislead-
ing in the Indictment 1t clearly indi-
Gated the note in question.
Mr. Butler insisted that the vari-
ance was substantial and fatal be-
cause the words ito maturity" gave
the note a different charac ter and i'm
maker Mr.. Butler then asked for
general ruling of the court on the
question.
Judge Lewis said that he was in
clined to deny the motion to strike
out at this time, but that later if, and
upon further consideration, he found
he was in error, he would reverse his
ruling and strike out the instrument
The county attorney then proceeded
with the reading of the note and was
again interrupted by Mr.. Butler, who
discovered another variance between
the indictment and the note, but his
objection was Overruled. After the
county attorney had finished reading
the note, Mr.. Butler moved to strike
it all out as the indictment alleged
four Endorsements that do not appear
on the instrument itself. In all MI
Butler pointed out six variances which
he contended were fatal.
By consent of counsel the court took
the motion under advisement until
this morning.
The county attorney then read to
the jury states exhibits 109 and no.
being the credit bills discount and the
note of A. r. Kiefer and William
Bickel for $780, Mr.. Buffers motion
to strike this note from the record on
the ground variance and we'll as If
relevancy incOmpetency and imma-
teriality was likewise denied. Under
this ruling the county attorney read
to the jury all the notes set forth in
the Indictment. aggregating about
50 300 Mr. Butler noting an exception
TO the ruling of the court in each in
:; ance.
Just before adjournment the state
succeeded in getting in evidence the
Nusser notes, Notwithstanding that
there are not mentioned or referred to
in the Indictment. Mr.. Butler object
ed vigorously but was OYerruled The
trial will resume at 10 a. m today