The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-02-20
IN THE C0UGHL|A TRIAL
The Defense Does Not Deny the
Defalcation.
A PERSONAL ENCOUNTER
Two of the Attorneys Have a Lively
Spat. but Were Quickly Separated.
Coughlin Depending on Tech
nicality for His Defense.

Inc trial OF John w. Coughlin on the
charge of embezzling funds from the
Anaconda company developed the fact
yesterday that the defense does not
intend TO deny the defalcation, but de-
ponds on a technicality to get Coughlin
out OF the scrape. He is charged with
| taking money from the Anaconda COM
pany. The proofs show that this mon
ey was taken from funds contributed
to various causes by the employees of
the company. The contributions were
pald 10 the company, and by the latter
paid TO the parties Tor whom the sub
sciJptions We're intended Coughan S
attorneys therefore argue that the An
/ aconaa company lost nothing, and that
! the endorsement, If there was one
was from other parties than the COM
pany.
The proceedings yesterday were en-
llVened by personal encounter be-
tween two OF the attorneys. but the
combatants were separated before SER
i louS damage was done.
j. J.. Teal, the bank clerk of Hoge
| BroWnlee q Co.'S bank, was again on
the witness stand yesterday morning
and testified further TO the erasure OF
the $500 check item on the check list
l after 1t had been sent to the Mountain
Con office and the distribution of the
$40J among oJner items on the list
/ j. Y. Long, cashier of the bank, testi-
fed that l,346 vouchers were returned
to the mine office at the time the $400
check was returned, and that NUMBER
was noted on the check list, but the
list now only shows 1,345. Mr.. Long was
/ questioned regarding a check issued by
the Anaconda company to the ST.
James Hospital association for the pur-
pose of showing how Coughlin covered
I up his defalcation. Mr.. Cotter objected
to the question, and said the defendant
was not on trial fol taking from the
hospital association. He SAID the state
| had evidently fallen down on its case
ana was trying to bring in another
! case.
/ The gentleman may think we have
| fallen down, but the chances are that
he does not" replied MIR. Welcome.
| MT. Welcome wanted to show the
materiality OF the evidence, and while
he was stating it the jury was ex-
cused from the court room. He said
1t could be shown how it was that the
| books Of the Anaconda company
| showed as much money paid out as
taken in at the time of the alleged en-
bezzlement. The defalcation was COW
cred up by changing tlgures on the re-
turned check list and by manipulating
the HgureS on the returned checks The
Anaconda company owed the st. James
Hospital ASSOCIATION S1,642, but Cough
lin issued a check only for SLAP, for
which latter amount the check was
cashed by the bank 1nd returned as a
voucher to the mine office. The check
had not been perforated, ana the bank
made note of that fact, but after the
check had reached the Mountain Con
office the figures Il 642" were perfor-
ated on it, and the written figures were
raised from $i,442 to 81, 642 The same
change was made in the check list and
$500 OF the $500 was covered up. The
Anaconda company also owed James
MacFadden $2,931.i5, and Coughlin is
sued a check for S2I31.75, for which
amount 1t was cashed and returned to
the mine Office as a voucher, and after
1t reached the mine Office it went
through the same course of treatment
as the st. James Hospital association
check. It was raised to s2,s3T.7s, the
perforations for that sum We're made,
ana the figures on the check list ware
made TO correspond, and the $500
drawn on a check made payable to Pat
Mullins and appropriated by Coughlin
was covered up and the books of the
company showed everything correct.
After Mr.. Welcome had made his !
statement The court overruled MIR. Cot
ters objection. There is a we'll
known MAXIM, said the court, that |
fraud always turks in hidden places. |
and this testimony is competent"
Mr.. Long testified that he cashed I
both the st. James and MacFadden |
checks The former called for SLAP /
and was paid to the Sister Superior of I
forated in the check and Mr. Long +
made note of it and made an affidavit
at that time as TO its condition. The
testimony regarding the MacFadden
check was that it came through Clark
Bros bank and was for So 1915. 1t
was afterward. after reaching the mine
office, perforated for $2973.15 and
raised to that sum.
On cross-examination Mr. Cotter
asked the witness if he knew by what
ma he
indebted to MacFadden and the St.
James hospital. The court sustained
an objection to the question, and said
that was matter or defense.
Who is James MacFadden?"
He is a priest.
In the employ of the Anaconda com
pany?"
mo, sir
A. G. Black. bookkeeper at Hoge.
Brownlee & Cos bank, was recalled,
and Mr.. Cotter objected to it, but Mr.
Connolly said the witness was neces-
sary to be recalled because of the mat
tiers brought out by the defense, and
the court allowed him to testify. The
witness told about the changes made
on the check list after it had left his
hands
Mr.. Connolly asked permission of the
court to indorse the names of Sister
Mary Zita and Sister Louisa OF the ST |
James hospital upon the information as
additional Mr.. Cotter objected on the
ground that not a sufficient showing
had been made to show the necessity
of the witnesses. He said the state
was seeking to change the entire char
acter of the prosecution,
Mr.. Welcome, in reply to Mr.. Cotter
said the testimony sought TO be
ELECTED was not IN regard to the crime
charged against the defendant but to
show the efforts of the defendant to
cover up the crime, which was brought
out b. the defense. Mr.. Welcome said
they had endeayored to keep out all
of other crimes such az
raising checks and forgery. but it was
made necessary by what the defense
had brought out. The court permitted
the names 10 be Endorsed. but took oo-
casIon TO criticise the state for the
manner Of its conduct in the case. He
said the attorneys did not seem To