The sun., 1898-06-18
FIGURES N ABUNDANCE
Continued Prom Page One

cfrGk- SAu ABiLA tnh1 Nr.t
charged in the Indictment with mIsap-
plying the iundsr'
a'NO sif. !"
Then the hank has lostT
"Ye."
Has the hank succeeded in recover
| ing any part of sbe 5000 and 500
bonds represented by Thomas ; Clark
NO, sir
why haven't tl,os- bonds been col
| lec1esl9''
MOI able To collect them"
Your hank holds tlse-e bonds ioE COZ
/ IeetIon7- cros--examined MI. Blggs.
I Yes"
They are in your possession as dehs
Z 10 he coliecde1l2''
'-Ye-, sir.
Your attorney has notified Thomas :,
/ Clark
-Y=-. sir"
Have yo1 made any endeayor TO col
lez1 theni%3 said Mr.. NaDdegriir-
Yes"
Have YOU been suGoessiFl?''
We have net. .
John II. BatemzB. former cashier OF
the First National Bank, was recalled by
Mr. Vandegrift. -
-.s cashier Of tie hank in 1870 did
YOU or any Of the beard know that
funds were icing Iet to Thomas ;.
Clark T'
NO. sir
Did You know that this was going
On %'
No
ibid anyone e!sc *'
Not that | know Of.
Would YOU have permitted Thomas
: Clark to Rave ogerdraHn his accounts
7 had YOU known 1t ~
No"
why not? ?''
The objection Of NJ. Biggs to this
question was sustained by the ccur.
WAS it on account Of anv personal feel
ing Or misunderstanding with Mr. Clark
that YOU would not have permitted him
TO oyeFdr4w biz account, and why NOT :
Mr.. Biggs objected and was sustained
hv the court. but not before Mr.. Nande-
grift bad stated tiat LIE did not know
wbat the Government would do in case
ii was limited to certain testimony.
Judge Bradford replied By saying he
could not % beyond the rule for the "a ke
u the Government.
IN conclusion the court said 1t must
Sustain the objection ior the present, but
thai the question might - necDnsGered
later ia the trial.
Ar. Bateman. Thomas II. Clark kept
an account with the Fir-t National Bank
few vea.= prior 70 the flight Ol William
y, Bgyg-. did he nfF'
Yes"
How long beiore?'
''ADoHt ~ years
Mr.. Bateman, did you Dr not, once or
oitener. direct that Thomas Clark Close
his account with the bank
The celITt sustained the objection Ot
Mr. Biggs to the question.
Ezekiel Cooper wa- recalled to the
stand BY Mr Nandegritr.
Have you tie Farmers check Dprk
here oi October l.. 1891. Ii - turn to
il and re whether Or not on October H.,
1893. the Farmers received the first
check of $50 oi Thomas ;. Clark. for
collection on the First NatioEa! Bank?
. 1T il here"
. Was the item TetUrnedf
NO sir"
Turn to October 81. l,.$. to the sl75
l item"
October 81. 1873, Thomas : Clark,
:I75."
Was il paid OF returned?'
Paid
November II. l,g$. for sa5,
: November Il, l,93, Thomas :. Clark,
So
Was it returned or paid?''
Paid"
. December ). 500"
. december ). 500, Thomas :. Clark. -
. Was it paid:'
Paid.
december y, $lg7l5."
''Drcember l2, Thomas :. Clark. item
/ sI91l5."
t Wa: il paid?'
"P4id."
The other checks Of Thomas :. Clark,
a which were paid. follows: June %, 1894
. $3.50; July >, so; February L, 1896, $50
9 and November 20, $50.
This check that you say was paid
February y. 1896, could YOU tell tht
number or date asked Mr.. Biggs.
n ..NO.'i
e or the payee!
- NO, SIR
" 'All you can say is that these checki
: were paid and that all you know
i Yes, with the exception Of the checs
s Of November 90 1896"
Why this cheek
1t was paid over the counter"
Cashier Morris, Of the Farmers Bank
e was recalled and corrOborated figures 0
- Mr.. Cooper by letters, after which TIL
@ books and letters were admitted in eyi
dence.
The court then discharged the ju,'
"a until Monday morning at 10 O'Clock
Il again warning them against holding an.
to conversation with any one in reierenc
to the case on trial beiore them.
During the day United States Senate
~ Richard Rollins kenney, J. Frank Allee
&c John r. McGOnigal and Harry For
II were in Wilmington but did not wish tn
ID court room.
g Industrial Notes.
le Jackson Il Sharp Company have tw
- large barges on the ways which ar
nearly completed and will Re launche