The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-05-08

nearly the entire session of the federal
court yesterday. The day closed with
the arguments to the jury of Judge
prosecution and the defense respect
lively. The closing arguments will be
made Monday morning by Judge Pow
! ers for the defense and by Judge Judd
| for the prosecution.
| Some incidents occurred during the
| day to break the monotony of the court
| proceedings.
| Soon after court opened Mr.. Brown
was engaged in arguing his motion to
require that the prosecution elect one
of the three counts it desired to stand
on. In talking to the motion the attor-
ney asserted that the prosecution had
| they intended to prove, too much like
the gambler who keeps a card up his
| sleeve" Judd resented the insinuation
and exclaimed hotly: ANY insinuation
| that have a card up my sleeve is un-
warranted and ungentlemanly." The
matter was here dropped without fur
Their comment and Mr. Brown proceed
ed with his argument.
In the afternoon the court was inter-
rupted by a visit from a very talka-
tive parrot which entered through the
window and persisted in demanding a
cracker. 1t finally lighted in the lap
of Judge Judd, who silenced the par
rot's talk by covering it with his hand
kerchief and placing 1t under arrest,
which tickled Judge Powers, set every
body laughing and brought a smile from
Judge Marshall.
MOTION TO DISMISS OVERRULED.
After the opening of court Judge
Marshall denied the motion Of the
I II Nl.n& ha
quired to elect one of the three counts,
and also the motion to dismiss the case
on account of insufficiency of evidence
to support the Indictment.
The prosecution offered in evidence
the quarterly reports of the Salt Lake
postoffice and rested.
Arthur Brown made the opening
statement before the jury for the de-
Tense. He said the defendant did not
steal, purloin or embezzle S3072, or any
dollar or cent of it. The prosecution
has not claimed to be able to put it's
hand on any particular sum of money
or thing taken, or at any particular
time. If discrepancies had occurred,
Mcbride was not responsible unless it
could be shown that he had the exclu-
sive control of the Office 1t was not
Mcbride, but Barratt, who had exclu-
sive control. Mcbride wrote papers as
a clerk, but Barratt was responsible
and as matter of law and fact Nc
Bride had not the control of money
Mcbride will testify said Mr.. Brown
directly opposite to Captain Nichols,
and when you have measured the two
men on the stand, ask you which one
you will believe? There is no doubt
but that you will believe Mcbride when
he says that the statement of Nichols
is without foundation
Ex-Postmaster A. n. Nash was the
that the defendant had served as his
assistant, and that his general reputa-
ton was good.
Mrs. Kate Mcbride, wife of the de-
PENDANT, said that both she and her hus-
band were at home sick from Jan. 4
to Jan. IA, 1897.
JUDGE MBRIDE.
Judge John r. Mcbride, father of the
defendant, now residing in Spokane,
Wash, said he Iame to Salt Lake upon
learning of his sons arrest. He had an
interview with Captain Nichols on the
evening of Feb. 8, 1897, and discussed
the charges made against his son. Mr..
Barratt was present during part of the
conversation. He asked Nichols what
evidence he had against his son. Mich
OILS replied that he had evidence, and
showed him some papers. Witness then
asked if Frank made any admissions.
Nichols made no reply, except calling
to Barratt who said that Frank made
no admissions.
DEFENDANT TESTIFIES.
Frank M Mcbride, the defendant,
next took the stand. He said he was
IS years of age. and had been assistant
postmaster under A. n. Nash and c. NJ.
Barrett. He surrendered the keys to
the door and vault Jan. 8, 1897, to Mr..
nIrc-i
of the office. When the stamp clerk
needed stamps he made a reGuisition
for them to Mr. Barrett, who asked wit |
ness to buy the stock, which was de- |
livered in the presence of Barrett to |
Cunnington, the stamp clerk, who I
checked them up. The amount OF
stamps was charged against Cunning |
ton as cash. and hegwas given credit /,
for money deposited by him. Barrett |
determined the amount that should be |
rut on the deposit slips. The drafts |
were made payable to Barrett, and en- |
dorsed by him, and he took them to |
the bank. In no case dia the witness |
endorse them. The deposits were usu-
ally made in the Deseret National bank. !
but in verifying the transcripts he found /
there were some deposits at McCor- |
hicks. Witness said his salary was ST. |
see per year.
aside from your salary asked Mr.. |
Brown, "have you taken, during the |
Period from May 1, 1895, to Jan. Ii, |
1887, any funds out of the postoffice?"
Not a dollar
Ever stolen or applied any money, |
other than according to your duty?"
mo, SIR
do you know Nichols?"
Every we'll"
do you remember having seen him
on the night of Jan. IA, 1872"
YES" --,--.
Did you ask him the amount of the
shortage?"
mo, SIR
do you remember being arrested?"
every we'll"
Witness said the warrant was SERVED
on him by Deputy Marshal Swan. He |
walked to the commissioner office with
Nichols, and had a conversation with
hirl.
I'm that conversation, did Nichols
say to you, There is no use saying you
don't know what became of the
mo, SIR
did you say that you knew what be-
came of the shortage?"
Did you say it then. or at any
tinne?"
mot then. or at any time"
The defendant. testified that he knew
of the shortage of Cunnington of $685.
Attention was called to it by Cunning
ten about Jan. A, 1897. There were fire.
quent shortages in the stamp clerks
owing to the number sold,
and the small coin.
When Cunnington informed me of
the shortage" said the witness, II sug-
gested that he put it up. He said he
expected to get some money from life
insurance or building and loan, and
would put it up" The defendant said