Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1898-07-21


ness. He was likewise under custody,
while endeavoring to understand the
boUks.'
Mr.. Bird retorted: "This is the first
time 10 my life have ever heard that
a laGyar should hesitate as TO whore
he gets his evidence when mans
liberty is at stake. Which ia more
important, that the confidential re.
lations of a witnesses should be pre.
served or C mans libertyY
Judge Bradford remiuded Mr., Bird
that these remarks were entirely out Of
place. whereupon Mr.. Bird said s"I
did not bring il up" and Mr.. Van
degrift added 81 would like to know
who did,"
boggs then stepped down from th,
stand.
I. Edward Ross was recalled, and
testified what he found Kennsy's trus
account at the First National Bank TO
bs after he had compared the In
dividual ledger of that institution with
the books of the Farmers Bank and the
Union National Bank. The dates given
were in 1896 and prior to thoas men
TONED in the indictment. The result
Of the comparison was as follows: May
4th, charged with an overdraft OF $40. 55
and should be an overdraft of s165. 5.87;
May 9th, credited with balance Of
SS4. IL and should be an overdraft of
S606. 81, May 9th, cradited with bal
ance Of So, 279 80 and shnuld be an over
draft of SAB. So: May 18th, creditsd
with balance of S410. "a and should be
an overdraft of s7l3. 80; May 18th,
credited with a balances Of S47. Sc and
should be an oyerdrHft of S77.44; May
2lst, credited with balance of S5lS. 80
and should be an overdraft of 81, 236. 54;
June 9th, credited with balance of
SCI. Do aud should be an oysrdraft of
81, 30l. 45; June goth, credited with a
balance Of $40. 10 aud should be an
overdraft of sl,S69. 72; July 2lst,
credited with balance of $40. n and
should be an overdraft of S2;45O. 90;
August 25th, credited with q balance
OF Sdh 08 and should be an overdraft ct
81, 49S. 81; September I'd, credited with
balance of S96. 10 and should be an
overdraft OF 81, 744. 65; October 24th,
credited with balance of sS49. 65 and
should bs an overdraft of 1892. 35:
October 26th, charged with an over
draft Of s457.07 and should be an over
draft of 50, 351. 80; Dscembsr let,
credited with balance of 1892. At and
should be an overdraft Of ss06. 49,
Court took recese unit 2. 30.
One of the most important eventa
of. the afternoons session was the
argument on the application of the
defendant'a counsel to have E. Z.
Copper brought here from the Trenton.
N. j., Jail to testify in regard to
conversation which ia alleged to have
taken place between himself and Will
liam N. Boggs.
]. Edward Ross, an expert accountant
from Philadelphia was the first witness
called to the stand by District Attorney
Vandsgrift. He was questioned by Mr..
Vandegrift concerning certain matters
which had boen testified to at ths
morning session, and in ths cnurse OF
his remarks said tina. he desired to !
correct SONIC errors which he noticed in
the record of some of his former tesii-
mony. He was permitted 10 do sn.
The corrections did not differ materially
from the published reports OF the pro
ceedings.
The witness was cross- examined by
Senator Gray, and in the course Of the
cross-examination he said Keuney had
Kept very active account, meaning
that the deposits and checks ware fire.
quent. Senator Gray asked: We're the
overdrafts to which you havs testified
paidY
Ross--Yes, sir.
Gray--Each oyerdraft was not nsceH-
sarily an independent amouutY
Ross--No. sir. The previous over
drafts would be included.
In reply to Mr. Vandegrift, witness
said that on May 9th there was de.
posit of 80, $50, showing balance of
81. .270. 80, and on May 7th three checks
reduced the balance to $110.74. but as
. matter of fact check for $500 was
paid ON May 9Th aud not charged up
until May llth, whereas IL it had besn
charged up on May 9Th, there would
have been an ovsrdraft on May 7th of
about S4l3.
William N. Boggs was called to ths
stand by Mr.. Vandegrift, who asked
lim: N ga
You have testified in the examination
with respect to the Cuthbert checks.
hat in one of those checka you had an
interest. Did you and Ksnney both
,aye an interest in itp
Boggs-Yes, sir. One hundred sharea
II stock were bought, of which he had
10 and l had 80. as.I
Mr.. Bird asked: That check was mss
nut OF Kenney's 8 own funds; that iss,so
ar as be was inrerestedf
Boggs-YeB. sir.
Ex-oAsHIEE BATEMAN TEsTIFIEs.
John II. Bateman, who was cashier
Il the First National Bank of Dover at
he time of the dsfaloation, was put
lpon the stand by Mr.. Vandegrift, and
10 identified certain papers which had
,aaead between the lJnion National
Sank of this city and the First
National Bank of Dover. which were
fterward admitted in evidence. Mr..
Yanuegrift askpd him: 1t has been
estified that during 1896 certain checks
4 Kenney were paid by the bank and
lot charged on the books until different
ates afterward, and also that he gave
hecks to Samuel L. Shaw for 81, $50
nd to William Anderson for amounts
egregating over 81, 200; also to e. B.
Juthbert d Co. for over 5000. which
sere paid by the bank and never
harged to his account. Had you any
of them?
Bateman-No, sir.
Vaniegrift-If you had known 1t
'ould they have been paid?
Bateman-They would not have been
aid If he had not the money there.
Vandegrift Did the teller have
uthority to loan money or permit
verdraftsp
Bateman-No, sir.
Vandegrift-These checks being car
led for the defendant, how should they
ave been shown by the booksf
Bateman-As oyerdrafts.
vandegrift- How should they have