The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-11-16

show that the engineering department
was not at that time nor for a long
time previously issued any time checks,
that there was plenty OF cash and that
Southall never had the right to sign
the time checks except at odd times
in the absence Of Mr.. Du Shane from
the office. He would show that southalE
had written a letter confessing his
guilt to the late Col. King. and an
other such letter to Lieut.. Keller.
thanking the latter for not prosecuting
him. He would also show that SouthalI
had confessed to Jared How and to
Mr.. Butler that he had issued fraudu-
lent time checks in June and July,
1897. He would call David NJ Emmons
to the stand as the first witness.
ENTERS A DEMURRER.
The witness took the stand and had
barely told his name when Mr.. Nelson
arose and said that he wanted to give
notice that he would demur to the
indictment. The court wanted to hear
his objection at once, but Mr.. Nelson
did not want TO state them, explaining
that he had not his authorities at hand
to sustain the demurrer The court
did not think that he could make any
more than a formal objection. unless
he desired to offer argument in support
OF the objection. Mr.. Nelson said that
he objected to the introduction of tes-
timony, because the Indictment did not
specify a public offense He would
argue the motion if given time Judge
Brill reluctantly ordered an adjourn
ment until 2 o'clock
The argument Of the counsel was to
the effect that the Indictment did not
specifically set forth that SouthalI had
been guilty Of an intent to deprive the
l..
OF their money. He contended
that the statute provided thai
the indictment should specify
"defraud and deprive" The argu-
ment was purely technical and many
authorities were quoted to show that
the letter of the statute must be fol-
lowed IN the drawing Of the indict-
ment Mr.. Anderson replied briefly
and the court overruled the objection.
whereupon there was an exodus of
lawyers who had gathered TO hear the
argument and the ruling. Then people
settled down in their chairs and Nj
Emmons took the stand.
Mr.. Emmons said he was in the real
esinte business and dealt in CONNER
cial paper-'And, he added, II bought
Southal time checks" He had been
buying Southall time checks from
SouthaH personally for a year and
seven months. He was given the orig
inal time checks mentioned In the in
dictment upon which the defendant is
being tried. and after looking them
over snld he had seen them before.
He had bought them personally from
Southell July II, 1897, paying him $3.50
In cash. He bought them in SouthalFs
office In the government building. Mr..
Anderson examined directly:
Did you ever have a conversation
with Mr.. Southall as to the genuine
ness of the paDers?'
mo"
What did Mr.. southau tell you
about the papers2''
Mr.. Nelson objected because the
question had already been answered.
Mr. Emmons wanted to explain. The
objection was overruled, and then fol-
lowed a sharp encounter as TO the ad-
INSTABILITY Of evidence as to repre-
sentntions made al the time OF the sale
OF time checks other than those men
toned In the indictment. The
QUESTION WAS VITAL.
as the witness had already stated that
he had no conversation at the time Of
this particular deal. and no verbal mis-
representation was made at the time Of
the transfer OF the time checks men
toned in the indictment. The state
contended that the misrepresentation
was made at previous time, and
there was no need FOR explanation at
that time. The court ruled with the
state.
The witness then snted that the time
checks offered IN evidence were Just as
they were at the time he bought them.
Again came the question az TO the con-
versation,, and eventually Mr.. Ander-
son framed a question which opened
up line 10 prove the representations
OF Southal. The witness could not re-
member when he had his first CONVEX