Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1898-06-30
DELAWARE GAZETTE STATE OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES della

made possihlo by an arrangement with |
somebody in tho hank, and he claimed
that such evidence showed concusively |
Clark's guilt
ATTORNEY BtGGs' ADDRESS.
immediately after Mr.. Vandsgriit
had finished Mr., Biggs, counsel for the
defence, began his address, to the jury.
In opening, Mr.. Blggs aaid tho district
attorney tad not referred to conspiracy
and there had bean no evidence to SNOW
that thara was any conspiracy. lie read
portion Of the section OF the United
States Revised Statutes bearing On the
subject, and said that in order to con
Wet his client it would bc necessary
Tor the Jury TO be convinced that when
tho checka were given in May, 1896,
which had hecu referred to, he had tho
infant TO defrand the bank. llH snid it
was not denied that the checks we're
given on Il. u. Cuthbort & Go. aud tho
checks vent to tho Dover bank, but
when they reached there the rCsponsi-
bility WAS with William N. lioggs.
The crucial test showed TINT the owl
hsncc of William n. Boggs must be
alone relied upon. Tho documentary
evidence, he held, only corrobnrated
William n. BoggB In an immaterial ro-
spect, hut did not corroborate the all0'
CATION that there was intent on thu part
of Clark to uefraud the bank. Concern
| ing OK Cashier Bateman, Mr.. iiigga
said that for all he Knew what waa
going on at the bank he might have
been asleep.
Harry A. Richardson did not know
what was going on; Irving u. Bnggs
was merely n calculating machine: viii
liam N. Boggs virtually ran the bank.
| Ii those people wuro cnntont 10 run the
bank that way, MIR. Richardson saying
that he trusted William n. DQggs as
far as he would anybody, that is their
affair and not Clark's,
Mr.. BiRgH rontcnueh that il would
not be possible for ANY living man To
tell what ho took FROM the various ac
uounta to make UP the enormous
amount OF sl07, 0O0. CLARK, he adj
mitted conducted his banking business
uarelessy. handing money to Ioggs on
the street and sending it to him. some
timos with sims and sometimes with
out, and il is possible that some Of the
sl07, 900 amy have been taken from
Clark's account. MIR. Cark, like
others, had absolute confidence in
BoggH.
Mr. Biggs called attention to lioggs'
position, stating that he had onfesscd
to robbing the hank, and saying that be
would not have been permitted tc
testify if sentence had been imposed.
hut as judgment was suspended, he
was permittDd TO come hero and tastifS
against a citizen whose liberty, ana
almost his life, are at stake. Did
| n,k
fectly disintarested witness? His con
duet would not indicate that he wa
giving the evidence Of disintersstot
witness, as tho district attorney say
he il. DO you believe, gentlemen, Mr.
Biggs asked, that Boggs went upon tht
, stand and testified without prejudice
, Mr.. Riggs referred to the remark o
the district attorney that he woult
treat the indicted man Gharitably whel
, they tuck the stand, he said il the line
} were drawn as tightly when they wer
put on trial as had been the case will
4 Clark, they would not receive mucl
I charity.
Referring to the $1,000 bonds, MIR
BiEgs said Senator Kenney had con
, tradicted him. kenney had said tn
bond was put in hia hands for collec
t tion; also that part of it was for
= gambling debt and Clark had DISPUTE
n the amount. Bogga said he bond va
to be paid soon; Kenney said Clar
o was to Us given his time. Boggs sal
J, Kenney collected $500; Senator Kanne
. says nothing was collected. VINO N
d you going to believer You cannot he
o lieve both of those men. Are you goin
/ to believe the man who by his ow
k qualifications has held different Office
y as gifts from the people; a man again
d whom not a syllable was uttersd unit
n by the venomous tongue Of William \
% Boggs?
J Mr.. Biggs said the testimony shove
I, that Clark was underwriting to pay wit
d his own money tho checks given
d connection with the Bay State Gi
" transaction. He said Clark's Rccoui
10 had been transferred 10 Boggs at Il
70 latter's request
Mr.. Riggs said that il BuggH b;
IN been the honest man people in Dov
Id thought he WAS two years ago Clal
il would not have been on trial for
C. crime which the punishment 10 not lie
T. than five years. the same as the prime
OF pal.
So While Mr.. Biggs was speaking cou
j. took a recess until 2. 30 p m.
w In the United States District Cou
id Thursday afternoon John Biggs cou
o. sci for Thomas S. Clark, in the 81
be against CLARK, in which the latter
th charged with aiding and abatting w
q. liam N. BogeH, the defaulting teller
4. this First National Bank Of Dover,
y sumo his address 10 the jury.
e- He began by calling attention to t
pc telegram relating to tho draft, VIII
IL. Clark had given on Cuthbeft Il CO.,
May, 1896, and said it was prouf tt
ey Clark gave his testimony truthful
hs 1t cannot be disputed no said, that I
ny draft was given and it was rot pa
AS and the red marks On the telegram prr
N. that Clark had not lied about
Tor matter.
ed CLARK, Mr., Biges said, owed Boz
Die some money not, however. as teller
las the bank, but as an Individual. 10!
ed must have had some money. lie was
tly only teller Of the bauk, but also tire
I'D urer of the building and loan assoc
zoe tion, and clerk of the town council, d
tb, made some money as an accounts
nix outside OF the bank and also an net
The public Referring to tho 81. 600 bo
lie he SAID it was an individual oblignt
my of Clark's TO Boggs, and the latter
nee included interest among the items.
loh claimed that the fact that Bogga |
rise testified that Clark gave him a CHI
on for S:'2 for gambling debt was
of proof that portion of the hond
in not represent a gambling debt
yer There have buen several witnct
by produced here, he said, to provo /
of NAME reputation for truth
the veracity. 1t is desperate case wi
but q prosecuting officer resurts to til