Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1898-06-30

ia Hu old but true suyiug that misery
likes company,
Referring to tho other indictments,
which are in evidence, Mr.. liiggs called
attention 10 tho fact that eaGh Of the
indicted mon had stood up aud with
upliite1 right hand had said he was
not guilty, aud Mr.. Bigga asked IL it
was reasonable to suppose that all of
these men werU in cunnpiracy with
Euggs TO defraul tho bank. Ia IL
reasonable to suppose, no asked, that all
OF thes9 people arc lying and William
N. Buggs alone is falling the truthY
Mr. bigg5 appealed to tho Jury not to
disgrace Clark and his wife and chill
den IN the evidence which had buen
produced. ClHrk's vito, Mr, Riggs
enid, hat stool by him throughout thu
trouble, from tho time tho marshal laid
his hand upon tho nccusud. The family,
be helu, muBt bear the blow with
Clark, IL it comes lie will he locked
up, bur the nther momhors Of tho flmily
must beer the humiliation.
In conclusion, Sir. Biggs Informed
the jurors that Ito would ask and oopli
IDENTIFY expected verdict of GOT guilty.
MIR. vAtDEsnlET CLOSES.
District Attorney VauiegriFt, who
made the closing address, informed the
Jurors that they were HSperlei, it they
should have reasonable doubt that
CLARK had 10 intention ~ dafrHud tho
bunk, not to convict. They are to give
Clark tho bsncfit of any reasonable
doubt Mr.. NHndegrift said there was
nothing in the case in the way OF ovi
dance which the government had not
DnlleavoTed to produce. lilo denied that
lIuggH was venting any venom Oh the
defendant. and asked the Jury whether
they would believe tho men who are
mailing their oHths across the doorS oi
the peuitentiary. lilo said n great
wrong had been committed against the
people Of the State ana it should be
| rightel in the same manner az wouid
he cut out tho Vilest cancer that in
| habits human flesh Furthor, 10 saiu,
! these indictments were not fuunu by
william n. Boggs; they were not fuunt
by the district attorney; but by 2
| men known az grand Jurors.
| Mr.. Nundegrift said he was nut prose
cutting the cases fran choice, but be
cause he was the prosecuting officer a
tina United States government
Bnggs, he asserted, did not return fo
the purpose of wrYuking vengeance
upon anybody. lie had returned t,
end bis uxilu and had told the govern
ment all he knew.
The government has no EXCUSES Il
make for ferreting out crime, he said
1t had right and ii was its province L
do 1t. Mr.. Vanlegrift said hs tool
81 a., - Ns.ntt
mony beyond question by corrnburatiu
it with documentary evidence.
ii Thomas s. Clark IL tho homes
man he is represented to he, Mr. Van
degrift asked, why didn't he deal wit
the officers nf the iankY Why was
that he did not take thoee two Ba
State Gas checks to Mr.. Bateman Q
MIR. Richardson and say he had not th
money but had lot OF gas to pay Their
within Why, il he had done this m
old friend BRtemnn would have falle
10 fit. The bank would heve foun
itself in most peculiar position
They would have found that Clark ha
5000 Of their money which they iii
not know he had. HIS also said til
bank would not have trusted ClGr
with five cents.
Concerning the $4,000 bond, Nj
! Vandegrift said it had heen prove
that no part OF it represented giant
? ling dent. lie called attention
= Boggs' statements concerning the 81
Elements of the gambling account
J and said Mr.. Boggs had not cxplaint
8 the $4,000 bond, and, aa he knew
I could not explain il, had lot il alon
Clark, he said, had COMA on the star
ami told all hes wanted to tell, but
did not tell what became of the lette
4 and checks which had bearing on Il
D bond. II Clark was an honest ma
q he commended, those letters and chez
> would be hsre.
u Mr.. Vandegrift said nothing suit
@ tho government better than when I'll
counsel for the defence put in eviden
u the indictments against the other me
Y and, exhibiting the indictment again
x William II. COtter, asked that tho Ii
pages of exhibits be carefully rca
!" He also asked for careful constierati
of the documentary evidence.
asked the jury 10 throw out the tes
u mouy of BUggs If it was found that
had tostiiiHl falsely, but even in til
RI event he claimed that conviction mt
:. follow.
~ Relative to Mr.. Riggs assertion til
70 not only Clark was heing tried, b
also the members of his family,
ol said it was ono Of tho unfurtunI
O. things connected with crime. Tho
people have my Gymputhy, no romarkt
70 as they must have you're, but tho govcl
~ mpnt cannot I'm on sympathy. But vii
IN you arc thinking of this ! want you
at look upon tho young man who has q
- fcsaca to this crimo; how hiH life mig
40 have hnen for great good 10 tho co
u munity il it had run in tho right CHI
70 mel; think OF the wiie aud babea
no lsft behind him; think of how tn
liyes were wrecked.
gs Mr. Vandegrift called attention
OF the Testimony OF the Rev. Aft
80 Smith, when he snid he would
ut believe Clark on his oath, judging
10 his reputation, and said it was
q, only answer no could mako under
nu oath. lie said Mr.. Smiths rcpy '
nt thu natural climax of that crime.
ny Vandegrift made strong appeal
"a, conviction and at tho conclusion of
w address, court took recess until
~ O'Clock Friday morning.
a1 TIE CHARGE or THE COURT
ok AT Friday mornings session Jul
lot Bradford delivered the charge to
lid jury, so follows:
Gontlemsn Of tho Jury Tho iud
ses ment charges the defendant, Thor
ais S. Clark, with violating section $40
nd the Revised Statutes of tho Uni
an States, and also section 54A0 of the
at. vised Stntutes of the United States,
ng amended by the act of Congress OF \
lat l7tl, 1879. The furmor section ia
ia follows
las Sec. 5209. Every president, tlirec
ce cashier, teller, clark or agent Of any
mt | annintinn- WIN nmhnzn Inc .lhrlrunt