New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-07-19
THE KINNEY TRIAL.
puurrING TESTIMONY OF BoGGs. THE
nETAULTIEG TELLER
.,-vr GRANTS THE APPLICATION OF THE DE-
rrxcE CALLING WITNESS FROM

r GRANTS THE APPLICATION OF THE DE-
vrycE. CALLING WITNESS FROM
TRENTON PENITEHT1ARY.
xxrSnston Del. July 1S-The second week OF
-. Renney tr,ai began this morning. Judge Brad
-. announced his decision the application
-. ny the defence for writ OF hsoeas corpus
=. rs.,rre the appearance OF Ezekiel T. Cooper. now
=. r.s Trenton IN. j. Pen;entary, as a result OF
,,s BoSgs defalcation, 70 give testimony. me
r,,,,r1 IN granting the application and making we
~, rsturna Die tomorrow at 10 o'clock said that
W. wss IN doubt about the authority Of the Circuit
-,,,rt Of this district issue writ for prisoner
IN Trenton prison. and that he was not certain that
,,r Cooper was not competent. In view OF doubt.
,oucver he would give Senator Kenney the ad-
ysr,.nss 0, II and would issue the writ
The defence then resumed It's examination OF wit
r..ses Amos Cole who obtained 500 from Boggs
A, a letter from Senator kenHey. testified in refer
soce 70 thst transaction. but nothing important
heveloped. William Anderson. the Philadelphia
h,u,der was examined regarding the receipt by hin
q. Senator Kenney's checks as payment for Boggs's
t.,1,nees dealings with him. He said he did not
t,ow Kenney in the building transaction. and had
no idea ~ the time he executed the contract the
Senators checks would be given.
The defence here rested It's case. pending the ex
animation Of Ezekiel T. Cooper upon his arrival
from Trenton tomorrow. BY agreement the Gov
ar1r,e1t began testimony in rebuttal
~
orspances in the statement of Senator Kenney
70 Boggs's resources in 1891 Considerable time
taken up with the testimony TO the witnesses
toss on Bay State Gas In mutual dealings. Senator
Ksnney had stated IL was S. 4O7 Boggs denied this
AND said II S407. He stated that the 1900 had
nothing TO do with their mutual dealings in Bay
State struggle followed between counsel as TO
what The g. 90 did represent but the Court held II
improper testimony in rebuttal.
Judge Bradford stated FUR
ther reflection he had 10 the conclusion that
the admission Of testimony as 70 what the C."p
rspresented WIS proper, and he therefore withdrew
nas adverse ruling and allowed BoEgs 10 state his
answer u the Dstrict-Attorneys question. The
witness said the 100 was deposit he had made
to Senator Kenney's account. ard result Of It
being necessary show funds for the Senators
checks which he had been Withholding. A Ore II
which had been deposited 10 the Senator's account
be san had come back protested. and K became
necessary 10 use sloc balance the accounts
properly. The s. 600 he sail. afterward paid.
Referring to the testimony OF Senator Kenncy
concerning Bay State Gas speculation. Bosss de-
MED that he suggested Mr. Kenney the adva1-
taSes he might derive from purchasing that stock
In another part OF the defendants examination
In chief the statement was made that during the
greater part OF July and August. 1896 Mr. kenney
was absent from Dover. District-AttoTney Vande-
grft asked Mr. Boggs II This was true. Bosgs re-
five days out Of SIX and in that time mode a num-
Der OF deposits at the bank
4 number OF deposit slips were introduced 10y
the Government tending Lend strength 10 Bosgs's
rebuttal testimony this point. Counsel for the
defendant admitted the slips made out by
Senator Kenney. but stated that they might have
been mailed.
number Of minor points and there were frequent
passages between counsel relative 10 the asking
of certain questions.
Deputy sheriff Downes called in rebuttal by
The Government and asked concerning ms
81 ESQ check given by Senator Kenney In Boggs's
farm transaction. Senator Kenney had said ina;
ne had recollection OF giving the check but
presumed that he did, and that he gave Il simply
10 secure the purchase until final settlement by
Boggs. Mr.. Downes said that the check was not
given TO the purchase but a. he UNDER
stood IT, Senator Kenneys check was the final
payment.
H Ratenen formerly cashier OF the bank
was called and asked II any order had ever been
ator Kenney A long and earnest argument fol-
lowed between counsel over the propriety of the
question. Judge Bradford admitted st. Mr. Bate
stated that ne had issued special orders to
BOsgs not 10 allow overdrafts in the accounts of
Mr Kenney and others. When pressed for his
reasons for issuing the order. the witness said
that MT Kenney seemed 20 show a disposition TO
Use the funds Of the beuk -onevhat too freely. An
effort was made by the DiFirictAtorncy TO have
him name the others he had IN mind when ne gave
T. zgs such an order. but this was overru!ed
Court then adjourned until tomorrow, wheh
Ezeliei r. Cooper who WIFI meanwhile have been
brought from the Trenton Penitentary VIII bs
examined briefly. The Government Will then cal
q few more witnesses in rebuttal, after when the
argument Of counsel will begin