The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-12-17


ton He said chat the district attorney
ANONYMOUSLY failed TO prove their
case. Regarding the 555 shares, the
defense had the testimony Of the two
Bacons and the two Hollands that it
was il the bank and owned by the
bank He argued that in the matter
OF the overdrafts, II Bacon had report
ed them wrongly, with intent to de-
fraud. he ought TO be on trial for in
SANITY, Tor any sane man would have
known that the bank examiner would
have been able to discover such a. dis
creDancY. He related the testimony
which tended to prove that overdraft
notes We're used, and that the placing
OF them in the schedule as loans and
discounts was consequently an error in
judgment, if It were an error at ALL
Regarding the discrepancy in the
matter Of liabilities, Mr. Booth said
that these had been reported as being
greater than the governments book
keeping showed. and on that there
could consequently be no conviction.
COLONEL ELLIS
Colonel Ellis then made his argu-
ment, which occupied the remaining
hour allotted to the defense. He open
ed with the statement that the offe2se
charged must be proved beyond a rea-
Sonable doubt, and that the defendant
was entitled to the presumption Of in
nCcence, until the government had
proved that there were frauds intended
to mislead.
Colonel Ellis considered that Magin-
MS lugubrious plea regarding orphans
who were robbed of their money was a
better compliment to his heart than to
his judgment, as the bank had long
since paid OF its debts The armor of
the defense had not been pierced by a
single shaft Of the district attorney.
The books showed that the bank was
possessor of 305 shares of stock, and as
it held $50 more as collateral on a note,
there could be no reasonable doubt that
ii owned the entire sos shares claimed.
Mr.. Ellis referred sarcastcally to the
attempt of the prosecution to convict
the defendant on the ground that there
were either too many shares, or not
enough. When the testimony of his
own witnesses did not suit him, the at
torney for the prosecution, with brow
of Hercules and frown Of Mars, .
threatened and Numbered.
Mir. Ellis argued that, as the report
had been signed by all the directors,
the responsibility for misrepreSenta-
lions was very widely distributed.
Not a. scintilla of evidence" he said,
has been brought out by the prose-
cution TO support their bo!stered-Up
claims. ] have never before seen the
government l6tl SO utterly d4iQ 1DSO-
lutely 10 prove a single fact in a case.
In q brief reference to the overdrafts,
Colonel Ellis said these were absolutely
right, and that no intent to deceive was
apparent. An o. j. note was properly
chargeable under loans and discounts,
and it would be impossible to prove any
willful attempt to defraud anyone.
MAGINNIS CLOSES.
Attornet Maginnis. in his closing ar
gument. said Mr.. Ellis had drawn a
beautiful picture but there was still
q grinning skeleton to confront. He
went into greater detail as TO inaccur-
acies, and referred scathingly to the
impeachable testimony upon which the
defense were depending.
THE CHARGE.
Judge Marshall's charge to the jury
was brief and impartial. He said the
defendant was charged with serious
crime but must be presumed to be in
nocent until proven beyond d reason
able doubt to be guilty. You are to de-
eide this case" he said to the jury,
con the strong probabilities it presents,
and these must be so strong as to eX-
Guide all reasonable doubt"
The court referred to the care with
which congress had sought to make ma
tiCnal banks absolutely safe, and a re-
port intended to misreDresent was a
serious affair. It would be necessary
for the testimony to show that the en-
tries were false, and that if so, that
-they were knowingly made, before the
conviction could be justly made. He
instructed the jury that they should
rely on the DreDonderance Of evidence
in deciding this. Counts one, two, five
and seven were withdrawn.
Colonel Ellis took some exceptions to
the charge, whereupon the jury with
drew and court adjourned.