The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-06-11

torneys looked at each other and
smiled as the motion was being made.
At the conclusion of Mr.. AnSierson's
remarks Judge Lewis safd.s Gentle
men of the jury, under the evidence
that has been submitted so far In this
case, the court is of the opinion that
the evidence conclusively lezpnerates
Mr.. Stevens from the charge which has
been presented against him, aad it be-
comes my duty at this time to direct
you to bring in verdictxof not guilty
in this case. The clerk will prepare
the verdict
The verdict said in effect that we.
the jury in the case of the State of
Minnesota VS.. Frederick G.. Stevens.
find the defendant not guilty. III. II.
Selby, one of the jurors, was asked to
step to the clerks desk and sign the
verdict as foreman. The clerk record
ed the same in the records and after it
had been read to the jury by the clerk
and they had answered that it was
their verdict court adjourned.
STORY IN DETAIL.
When the court opened yesterday
morning it was supposed that the
county attorney would move the case
be dismissed. Mr.. Anderson had as
much as announced that this would be
the action to be taken when he in
formed the court Wednesday night
that the state could go no further.
This statement was made owing to the
witnesses for the state who had been
summoned refusing to testify for fear
of eliminating themselves. The at
torneyS for the defense had also fought
against the introduction of testimony
presented by the county attorney tend
ing to show that Mr.. Stevens was an
officer or trustee of the bank.
County Attorney Anderson, however,
made no motion to have; the case dis
missed, but called Senator Sheehan.
one of the receivers of the bank, to the
stand. Mr.. Sheehan identified certain
books of the bank, including a cash
book and ledger, which had come into
his possession.
Pierce Butler, attorney for Mr.. Stew
ems, arose at this point and informed
the court that the defense was pre-
pared to admit what the state had been
trying to prove as to the official con-
nection of Mr.. Stevens with the Min
nesota Savings bank. Mr.. Butler, in
making this admission, said:
We spent the whole of yesterdays session
OF court in improper attempts to prove re-
lationship between the bank and defendant
1t is alleged in the Indictment that there was
a relationship. 1t is a matter of common noto-
riety that there was a relationship of some
sort between the defendant and the bank 1t
is fact and has never been denied Ny
client, all day yesterday, insisted that should
admit it, and l replied that that was not the
way to try law suit don't think it is. But
I think we have fully illustrated that this
indictment was found by a grand jury and as
sented to by the county attorney without any
legal proof of that relationship. Now, in or
der to save the time of this court, and in or
der to avoid Gf possible) repetition of the
occurrence of Observation-Disclosures in the
extreme to myself and my cient-we will ad-
NIT as fact in this case, and it, may be so
entered upon the record, that during the pc
riod covered by the bill of particulars, from
July TO Jan. 2, Mr.. Stevens was the nom-
nal president Of the Minnesota Savings bank
without salary, without immediate relations
to its funds, and, as the witnesses of the state
have testified, without charge, possession, Gus
tody or control of any of is funds or property
or the direction of any of its employees These
matters can be proved, and should have been
proved before the grand jury. They should
have been proved yesterday before this court
We asked counsel a number of times to state
what relationship he proposed 10 prove, We
asked the court to require him to elect, and