Omaha daily bee., 1897-06-23
HISTORY or THE BARrLEy CASE.
Causes Lending up to Ex-Stntc Trens-
nrcr'H Arrest md Conviction.

Causes Leading Up to Ex-Stnte Trens-
urcr's Arrest and Conviction.
The crime with which Joseph s. Barley
was charged and on which he tried was
the embezzlement OF $3.50, 1O1.75, being the
proceeds from the sae OF a warrant drawn
in accordance with the provisions Of law
passed by the legislature of 1895 This egis-
lature passed an act providing among nu-
merous other things, that the sinking fund
of the state should be reimbursed for the
money of that fund which had been tied up
by the failure of the Capital National bank
of Lincoln, which amount the legislature
found to be $3.50. .lO175. April TO- 1895.
warrant was drawn on the general fund for
this amount the warrant being in the regu-
lar form, but instead of being made payable
to BARLEY as state treasurer 1t was made
payable to him individually BARLEY came
to Omaha with this warrant and negotiated
its sale through the Omaha National bank,
the New York correspondent Of this bank
taking the warrant at its face. The notice
of the acceptance of the warrant was re-
ceived by the Omaha National bank April 26,
and in the meantime Assistant Cashier Balch
OF the Omaha National had asked BARLEY
what he should do with the pro-
deeds when received. Balch testified on the
trial that BARLEY told him to open an
account and pass it up to my credit and
the books of the bank showed that Balch
did exactly as BARLEY had told him. the full
amount Of the warrant appearing on the
books OF the bank on April 26 to Bartley's
personal credit. These same books of the
Omaha National bank showed that BARLEY
was in the habit of carrying an enormous
balance to his personal credit at all times,
this balance sometimes running as high as
$25OO GOO. 1t was also shown by these books
that the personal account of BARLEY had
been closed temporarily short time before
this warrant was sold and the full amount of
the warrant was checked out of the bank
within a few months after the credit was
made, the greater part of the money being
transferred to the First National bank of
Lincoln which was not state depository
at that time. From here 1t was impossible
to trace the money, the defense only being
able to produce checks which 1t alleged ac-
counted for $5000O of 1t, these being checks
distributing that amount among six banks in
different parts of the state which were state
repositories. The records of the treasurer's
office however, did not show any entry of
this amount, which, according to the claim
of the defense, was transferred from Bart
leys personal account
WARRANT CONVERTED INTO CASH.
Just before BARLEY went out of office, his
term expiring January 6, 1897, he called in
this warrant and 1t was sent to the Omaha
National bank for collection. BARLEY was
in the Omaha National bank when he drew
a check upon the general fund of the state
for the payment of the warrant and accrued
interest, amounting to $20l, ,SS4O5. The treas
urers books showed this entry, Bartley's
deputy teStltylnS on the witness Stand tnat
he made the entries at Bartleys dictation
Just before the latter's term OF office eX-
pired.
The records In the treasurer's office do
not show any record of this warrant for
SlS0,l01,75 with the exception of the war
rant register, which shows that the war
rant was registered for payment on account
of there being no money with which to cash
it, but this register does not show the name
of the payee Of the warrant or of the holder,
although this data is entered regarding every
other warrant passing through the office.
part of the line Of defense that
S164O0O OF this money was used by Bartley
to pay for bonds OF Saunders and Otoe coun-
ties which the Board of Educational Lands
and Funds ordered him to purchase with
money in the permanent school fund. The
defense alleged that BARLEY paid for these
bonds out Of his personal account, thereby
returning to the state this amount from the
amount realized on the warrant. The books
of the treasurer's office. however, showed
that the permanent school fund had been
reduced by the amount required to pay for
these bonds, and the natural inference was
that II BARLEY had used his own money. as
he claimed, he had taken an equal amount
out of the school fund OF the state and had
not accounted for it.
HARD FOUGHT BATTLE.
The trial OF the defaultng ey-treasurer
was one of the most hotly contested legal
battles ever fought in Douglas county, if
uOt III the state bdTllcy y attorneys, L. D.
Mahoney of Omaha and G. o. Whedon Of
Lincoln, are admitted on all hands to be
among the most able criminal lawyers in
the state. Old practitioners at the bar were
unanimous In the opinion that they had
never seen a case where every step was so
warmly contested in the BARLEY trial
No pretext for delay known to the intri-
cacies OF criminal law was left untried and
the innumerable objections raised by the
defense to every step in the proceedings
resulted in dragging the case into the third
week, when the same amount OF testimony,
In an ordinary trial would not have oc-
jury more than three dayo 1t is
not too much to say that there were
not dozen questions asked by the
prosecution during the whole trial which
were not objected to by the defense and
argued at length. The result was that there
was long delay between questions, and the
technical points raised necesstated calling
aud recalling OF witnesses in order to over
come technical points and this confused the
testimony to such an extent that II was al
most an utter impossibility for layman to
follow It in any connected manner. The
multitude of book accounts introduced by
both sides. with their hieroglyphic marks
lntelligible only TO the elect. was another
element which served to confuse the jury and
when the defense introduced its evidence pur-
porting to show what had been done with
The money the whole testimony resolved itself
Into an inextricable mass OF figures.
The interests of the state were in the
hands of Attorney General C. j. Smyth and
County Attorney II, H. Badrige, who did
the active work in the case, with Assistant
Attorney General e. Il. Smith and Assistant
County Attorney II, l., Day acting in an
advisory capacity. The objections raised by
the defense came with such rapdty and
involved such important technical points of
criminal procedure that the counsel for the
state were kept on the alert keeping their
testimony in line and overcoming the OBJ
Ieetons raised by the other side. SO thor
oughly was this done that it almost passes
the comprehension Of some OF the members
Of the bar who have watched the case how
the defense is going to find grounds for
motion for a new trial every technical
point having been argued and adjudicated
as the case progressed until there seems TO
be nothing left to which an exception may