The sun., 1898-06-16
there balance in the bank to the
account of Mr.. CLARKE"

account of Mr.. CLARKE"
Not sufficient to pay the checks"
"Whee, then, did you get the money?
"Took it from the funds OF the bank.
"What do YOU mean by that?"
'That / paid these checks with tn
banks money expecting to replace tn
same through funds received from Mr.
Clark, as had done in vast number O
similar instances.
Mr. Biggs objected to the answer
especially that referring to the "vas
number Of similar instances.
"We are here" he said, ITO answe
this charge and not that in reference tt
checks dating back as far as October 30
1893, and coming up to November 30
| 1896. Nineteen of these counts, as thu
court well knows have been abandoned
and the remainder, r,twenty-seyen counts
refer to eleven certain checks. Seven O
II thase eleven are barred by the statute
OF limitation so that now there are only
four left, two for $3.50 each and two fol
$50 each, making in the aggregate 5000
Now / contend that the district attorney
ought first to give proofs before he com
mences to introduce these cnarges Just
brought before u.s."
Judge Bradford requested that ques
tion be put and raised SO as the matter
would come up fairly before the court fol
ruling.
In order to settle this dispute Mr..
Vandegrift turned to Mr. Boggs and
asked the following question, first ad-
monishing the witness not to answer.
ION June 23d, 1894, did you not also
pay for Thomas S. Clark, through an
understanding with him check for
$l30?"
Mr.. Biggs then quoted number OF
authorities on this question and asked
tine court to confne the prosecution to
putting questions within. reasonably
wide latitude.
Mr.. Vandegrift, in his own defence,
said that he could, if he had the
necessary time granted him, show that
through the Vaccinations of the defend
ant with William N. Boggs he was en-
titled to the widest latitude and that he
had the right to submit testimony from
the time the transactions between Mr..
Clark and Mr.. Boggs started in 1893
Judge Bradford said: "Now the only
two cases that have been cited by coun-
sci on both sides are cases having a bear
ing different from those charged in the
Indictment. don't know that can do
better than cite what | consider to be
the leading case in this country and
which is similar to that charged in this
Indictment.
ut is that of Wood VS.. United States,
and that gives the Government the right
to introduce other acts and transactions
in evidence providing they are of kin
dred character.
Snow in this case if the district attor-
ney is able to show similar transactions
of kindred character prior to those
upon which we are to pass, the court
cannot say that it would not fairly have
an effect in ascertaining what was the
intention of the defendant in subsequent
transactions. And if the district attorney
intends to follow this evidence up link
by link, then this would be an addi-
tional reason why he should be allowed
to give this evidence and therefore the
testimony is admissible without any
doubt in the world"
Mr.. Nandegrift then stated that he
would now withdraw the question put
so that there would be no doubt of his
intentions.
Mr.. Boggs again took his place on the
witness stand and Mr.. Nandegrift con,
timed his examination.
You have stated that those two
checks or rather the check of May s,
1895 was paid out of the funds of the
bank by a previous arrangement made
with Thomas S. Clark.
81 will ask you whether or not there
were similar arrangements OF kindred
character existing between you prior to
1862"
''There were"
"In which checks were given by him
and paid by you?'
"Where are those checks?' .
"Those checks were delivered to Mr..
Clark on April 8, 1897"
"What else did you deliver to him?"
Letters and kilograms relating to the
checks"
"How much did these checks aggre-
gate?'
"Bctween 50, 700 and "a ,O00, the money
for which was abstracted from the
bank"
"Why did you deliver up these checks
on April 8, 1872"
IL had had a continual struggle with
Clark for years in reference to these
checks and at one time thought would
never deliver up anything for reasons
tl.at expressed to him. But at the time
delivered them up it was a question
whether or not money would benefi me
more than these checks and papers,"
"Did you and Clark 60 over these
,hecks together?'
1--WE did"
"Where at?'
"1n his office to ascertain what the ag-
,regate together with interest would
,monnt to-"
"What did you find?'
'"That the sum nearly reached $4,000
md he agreed to let it 60 at 900 and
,ave me bond for $4,000, by which he ;
assigned that amount to Richard r.
kenney."
~"Why was this done?'
"For the reason that bond made out
o me would have attracted attention,
whereas this would not happen in case
he bond was assigned to Mr.. Kenney.
Besides Mr.. Kenney was placed in a
,ettcr position to collect the money" ,
Then $4,000 was the aggregated" i.
Eyes"