The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-01-13
SUFFER SERIOUS CHECKS.
REQUEST TO NOLLE THE CASE
AGAINST BLANCHARD RE-
FERRED.
CrOss-EXaminatfGn Reaches the End
General News of Minne-
apOlis.


lty Of evidence as to the purpose for
which money was checked out of the
| Nicollet National bank.
Il think not" said the court "I shall
! sustain the states objection"
Well said Mr.. Jackson, apparently
surprised. Il had no idea the ruling
would be against US, or [ would have
argued further
1T was pretty well argued last
night" said the court, land / have
thought it over pretty well myself. 1
want to give a wide latitude, but we
don't want to get too far away from
the point at issue
Mr.. Hamblin again took the stand
for further cross-exam1nation.
AS l understand the court" said
Mr.. jackson, 1.-The court holds that we
have shown prima facie an embezzle-
ment of this fund"
THE court used no such words" said
Judge Elliott. You have shown that
this whole fund was not in that bank"
1--WE shall claim that if the money
was not there, the article was entirely
justified said Mr.. Jackson, which
made 1t appear that this was the evil
dence he depended upon.
From this point the defense went to
the offering Of the voIuminous report
of the Minneapolis Trust company,
which Mr. Flannery objected to. Mr..
Jackson claimed that the report show
ed that the receiver had charged in
terest for money loaned, which in real
ity was a portion OF the trust fund.
The court asked the noon hour to look
it over
The witness was again asked regard
ing. the change from the rebonding
scheme to the King SALE and witness
asserted that he did not determine the
change. 1t was the whole committee
that determined it. Those who were
at the Chicago meeting determined it
before witness went TO Buffalo, and
the balance after that time. The wit
ness did not remember whether Mr..
Hill expressed himself on the sale.
He did ask Mr. Hill if he saw any
objection to his buying some of the
bonds, and Mr. Hill said he would have
to get the approval of the balance of
the committee, which he did. That
was after receiving a letter from Mr..
King about the matter Mr.. jackson
showed that the trust deed had al
ready been drawn up ready to sign,
when the petition to the court was
made.
A copy of a telegram from Foster to
Coombs, of Feb. 81. 1895, in the Mime
apoHS Trust company letter book was
placed in evidence. This was a notif-
cation to the effect that the building
matter would come up March 2, and
the Pullman matter March f. Mr.
jackson showed by the witness that
before the offer had been made to the
trust company by King, the petition
was made to the court, but he also ex-
planned that Mr.. Foster who was act
ing for the prospective purchasers, did
draw up the proposition, being in Min
neapoliS at that time
There was a dispute at this point as
to certain evidence and statements of
Mr.. Jackson were excepted to by Mr.
Flannery
We'll, I'll leave it to a vote of this
court room,' said Mr. Jackson.
This court room is not going to de-
eide any of these matters" replied the
court.
The various check books which had
been used in the case were offered in
evidence, and were received as far as
they referred to the evidence wherein
reference was made to them The can
celled checks which the defense want
ed in were ruled out The printed
books, containing the evidence of Mr..
Hamblin in the hearing before Judge
Russell, was offered, but not admitted
at that time, and Mr.. Jackson stated
that he was through with the witness
The noon recess followed
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr.. Jackson asked that the state
nolle the case against Mr.. Blanchard in
the afternoon. He had no idea that if
would ever be tried, and he thought
+ hot
under indictment. The court took the
matter under advisement, and said
that a consultation would be held with
the county attorney.
Judge Elliott ruled against the de-
Tense on the points taken under con-
sideration.
II don't understand" said the court
that the article accuses the company
or its officers with any dishonesty eX-
certing in connection with this bond
deal. Any reference to this article to
dishonesty certainly refers to this bond
natter
Mr.. Hatch argued at length on the
claim that the defense had a RIGHT to
show any fact which might tend to
show dishonesty as its justification He
urged that the article was comment
on the Hart affidavit, and, as such, the
defense had a right to show dishon-
esty or bad faith in any transaction
The court adhered to its ruling
Mr.. Jackson discovered that he was
not through with Mr.. Hamblin and
asked some further questions relative
to the Nicollet National bank deposit
at different dates. At one date the bal
ance was shown to have been s972. S5.
while the credit to the trust on the
books amounted to $40,27449. At the
close OF business that day there was
an overdraft of $2457.55 A check of
100000 was handed the witness.
which he explained by saying that the
check was given as an exchange of
bank accounts, SO that while an over
draft appeared to exist 1t really did
not
The way you understand 1t the Min
neapolis Trust company advanced
$4,000 Of It's funds to the recetyershin
ACCOUNT" asked Mr. Flannery.
yes, sir
Mr.. Flannery took the witness for ex-
animation, and showed that the West
Pullman association was not obligated
IN any way, on the second mortgage.
Neither of the mortgages had been
made by the West Pullman associa-
ton, and could not be held in any way
In the matter. They were individual
mortgages. The legal title to the land
was not in the West Pullman associa-
ton at all, but in a trustee A certain
tract OF land was covered by one mort
gage upon which there was due $780,
600 and interest, also $3.50, 900 of special
assessments, which were paramount
interests to the bonds held by the Min
neapolis Trust company. The lots in
question were 25x120 feet, and that land