Omaha daily bee., 1897-06-22

! all the testimony showed tnAt not a single
dollar OF actual money had passed during
all the transactions involved in the testi-
mony He said 1t was all matter Of trans
ferring credits on the books OF the banks,
and he claimed that the statute defining
embezzement does not mention credits as
a thing which may be embezzled The
evidence he said had not convinced the
jury that the defendant ever received a
| dollar Of this money, or that he had con-
verted any Of it to his own use.
Mr.. Whedon's argument was very brief,
| occupying less than half an hour.
He was followed by Attorney General
1 Smyth, who closed the arguments Of the
case.
HOW ACCOUNTS WERE JUGGLED.
The attorney general said that all of the
| evidence introduced by the state, other than
| that having direct bearing upon the draw
/ Ing Of S2Ol ,SSl.05 from the general fund
/ for the payment OF the warrant had simply
! been introduced for the purpose of showing
intent. He said the actual money OF the
state was not kept In sepai ate piles, but
was all kept together, the books of the treas
| urer's office alone showing how much OF
the general pile belonged to the general
| fund how much to the school fund, etc,
| and all that was necessary to be done to ac-
complish what was intended by the law
| reimbursing the sinking fund was to make
| the necessary entries on the books. He
! charged that it was not necessary to draw
a cent out Of the bank In order to accom-
/
that this was done was of itself proof of
| the intent OF the defendant. He called at
| tention to the fact that the warrant was
| made payable to j. S. Bartley, and he re-
| minded the jury that there was nothing to
| show that the state owed BARLEY a cent
| He also called attention to the fact that the
| warrant register did not contain the name
of the payee of this particular warrant, al
| though the register showed the name of
| the payee OF other warrants He charged
| M itcpl nyiI bat tlp
| defendant intended to steal the warrant.
| The attorney general traced the warrant
! through the Omaha National to the Chem
! ical National, and the return of the proceeds
| back to the Omaha National, where they
! We're placed to the personal credit of the de-
| PENDANT. He then commented some Of
| the fallacous explanations OF bookkeeping
made by the attorneys for the defense, and
| exposed the meaning of the entries which
! he charged had been wifully distorted by
| them.
Taking up the theory of the defense as to
| the disposition of the proceeds of the
| rant, the attorney general dissected the tes-
| timony bearing upon this theory and said it
| evolved a course of reasoning which would
| lead to the most ridiculous conclusion ever
proposed in a court of Justice He said the
| adoption of this theory made it necessary
| to deny the accuracy OF every record in
| the tr6asurers Office and every report made
| by BARLEY during his last term.
INVESTED IN BANK SECURITIES.
Commenting upon the testimony of Banker
| Harwood Mr. Smyth said that testimony
| showed that BARLEY invested the money in
| the securities Of the bank He reminded
the jury that the state law prohibits the
| state treasurer from investing the money
of the state for his private use and benefit
| and he said that this testimony was enough
to convict BARLEY Of embe2Zlement. He also
stated that the state law provides that any
| person who aids or abets any public officer
| in such act Is equally guilty and he said
| If Harwood knew the money belonged to
! the state he was guilty of embezzlement
Referring to the statement made by coun-
| sci for the defendant, to the effect that if
| Bartley lis guilty of embez2lement it is not
| for embezzlng the money of the general fund
or Of the sinking fund, but of the perma-
nent school fund the ettorney genera, said
| BARLEY was not charged with embezzlng
| the money of any particular fund but was
simply charged with embezzing S2Ol SS4 .O5
| belonging to the state. He passed the most
severe structures upon the defendant for his
| moral turptude in setting up defense
| the fact that he had merely robbed the fund
| set apart for the Use of the school children
| Of the state.
| In conclusion the attorney general said
| the endorsement of BARLEY On the warrant
| made him personally liable for the amount
| and he was compelled to pay it when pre-
| sented and for this purpose he drew the
| money out of the general fund of the state
| To believe the statement of the defendant
| he said, the jury must disbelieve the monthly
| reports made by BARLEY. the records of his
| office and his last report made to Governor
Holcomb. He appealed to the jury to pass
| dispaSsionately upon the evidence and rot
| be swerved from their duty by any false
| feelings of sympathy. He said If they were
| to be swerved by sympathy they should
! consider the people who had endured priva-
| tion of every description in order to pay
| the taxes which the defendant had wilfully
| stolen.
JUDGE BAKER INSTRUCTS.
This concluded the arguments and Judge
| Baker at once commenced the reading of
his instructions to the jury. The iAstruc-
| tions were prefaced by a brief summing up
of the duties OF jurors and then followed
twenty-five sections setting forth the rules
and principles which were to govern the jury
in considering the evidence and reaching
verdict. The greater part Of the instructions
were those ordinarily given TO jurors in
criminal cases. but five of them had direct
| reference to the particular case on trial
and these are given in full herewith:
Seven You are instructed that the defend
ant could be required to settle with his sue
ceSSor in Oiice, and pay over the balance in
his hands at the close OF his term of Of
fee If any, at the office Of the state treasurer
| not be convicted in this prosecution for any
general shortage, If any, In his settlement
confined to the charge of embezzlement Of
s2Gl @ SSi;CS a an and you must find him guilty of
Sdlu tllntILlelnenl, or some part IntTeDt, or
YOU should acquit him.
Thirteen. You are instructed that II you be- |
l!eVe from the evidence that there was a |
deposit TO the credit of the state of Ne |
braska In the Omaha National bank, and that |
the defendant executed check or instru- |
ment as state treasurer, directing j. II Mil |
lard to be paid the sum of S2Ol sSi.o5 for his
own use and benefit, or to him as repre- !
that said bank obeyed the directions and |
charged on its books the said money TO the |
state of Nebraska, and lessened the states |
credit S20l, .05, such transaction was an |
| abstracing of taking from the cublic |
money of the state of Nebraska S201 SSi. .O5 |
and the jury should construe the check or |
medium by which the states money was !
transferred from the possession of the de- |
fendant, as state treasurer, to j. II. Millard |
in his individual capacity, or as a repre-
sentative of the Chemical National bank.
Fourteen. You instructed that If YOU |
find from the evidence that the state war
rant issued to the defendant, introduced in |
evidence. was issued to j. s. Barley as an !
individual and that the defendant disposed |
of said warrant, or caused II to be done or |
secured money credit for the same in his |
individual capacity and for his own use and |
benefit. or for the use and benefit of any
other person or persons or corporation ex- |
ce9t for the use and benefit of the state OF |
Nebraska; and If you further find that the |
defendant in his official capacity as state
treasurer took from the public money be- |
longing to the state of Nebraska or caused |
II 70 be done, to pay said warrant, or to re- |
imburse any person on persons, or corporation |