The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1898-12-20
SENATOR QyAY'S CASE.

V KSAAA ~ SAA0AN
The Answer ofthe District Attorney
to Quay's Petition for q Writ OF
Certiorari.
PHILADELPHIA, Dec 1s.-pistrlct
Attorney Graham to-day fled in the
prothonotary's ONCE or the Supreme
court, the answer of the commonwealth
to the petition Of United States Senator
NJ. s. Quay, his son, Richard R. Quay,
and former State Treasurer Haywood,
in which the defendants asked the su-
preme court for a rule to show cause
why writ OF certlorari should not be
issued to take up the record OF examtna-
ton In which the three defendants are
charged with conspiracy to misuse state
funds on deposit In the Peoples Bank.
True bills OF Indictment were returned
by the grand jury against the defend
ants and their trial was fixed for Mon
day, December ~, but on December 10,
Justices Green and Williams, OF the
Supreme court. granted the rule asked
for by the defendants and fixed January
z as the time for hearing arguments.
The district attorney says the state
ment that the defendants could not OBJ
tain a fair trial Is ''scandalous and un-
truthful and q gross imputatioD upon
the twelve Judges OF the Philadelphia
courts" and he declares It to be untrue
as charged In the petition that the
prosecutions were in6plsed by JudgS
James Gay Gordon as alleged.
Continuing. the answer says: The
evidence shows that public funds OF the
I.l mia fHR
years have been used by tho conspira-
tors for their private and unlawful gain.
Interest has been allowed by the Peo-
pies Bank on. the deposits OF public
money and paid TO the accused. In some
cases placed in the Individual deposit
of the accused in their bank account,
and checked out by them along with
their own moneys in the same account.
In other Instances, cashiers checks and
drafts have been made payable to the
accused for certain sums Of interest on
the public money and these documents,
bearing the endorsement Of the accused,
showing the receipt by them Of the In
terest money paid, are in existence and
In possession OF the commonwealth. The
books show that hundreds of thousands
of dollars Of public money deposited IN
the Peoples bank were set apart for
the use OF N. s. Quay and used by him;
and that he was charged no interest
thereon.
"The books show that hundreds of
thousands of dollars worth OF stocks
were bought for II. 8. Quay with tilis
money. That whenever he failed 10 use
his full allowance OF public money thus
set apart for him, interest was caretully
calculated upon the balance not used
by him in the purchase Of stocks, and
pald to the state treasurer. The dis
tricL attorney could not have failed nor
refused to proceed upon this evidence
and to bring the accused Into court to
confess or explain this testimony. This
respondent acted without the slightest
element Of malice, prejudice or feeling
The prosecution Is absolutely under the
control OF your respondent and no other
person. The averment or innuendo that
there is any conspiracy to prosecute
these defendants Is false. Respondent
respectfully suggests that II It were true
that some one inspired the prosecution.
yet II the prosecution Itself Is Just and
well founded, this can in no wise be a
defense for the accused.
The answer says 1t is utterly unlm-
portant and imperttnent whether Judge
Gordon, as private counsel for the presl-
dent OF the Peoples bank had Cashier
Hopkins private letters and that these
letters were used for political or othSf
purposes (Which averment i5 denled),
ana constituted no ground for the order
prayed for in the defendants petition.
The district attorney declares THAI
these proceedings were instituted before
Mr., Quay made the personal announce
ment Of his candidacy to succeed him
self in the United States senate. Why
a legal proceeding should be arrested
Iipon the ground that n defendant Is
candidate for office, the district attorney
"a nj n loss to understand and all aile-
cations to this effect, he says, are ir-
ravelant and immateTtal.
The district attorney AYERS that, IN
seeking trial for these cases. he is doing
simply his duty under his oath OF office
and that In SO doing he Is not preJudic-
ing and IntImidating the general assem-
bly,, The prosecution, he says, was
based upon discriminating evidence,
part OF which was produced before the
committing magistrate and before the
grand jury and the prosecution has no
other purpose than that OF bringing 70
Justice persons whom the respondent be-
neyes have persIstently violated the
laws Of the commonwealth and used the
pufyilc moneys Of the SUITE as though
they were a part OF their own private
property"
In closing the answer. the district at
tOrney says: Respondent AYERS that
appeals OF the extraordinary nature OF
the one made in the petition In question
where rules are granted accompanied
with stay of proceedings, that interrupt
the regular and orderly progress OF the
admlnlstration OF justice In the lower
courts are calculated TO do lrreparable
In1ury and to make Il Impossible to sue
cessfully prosecute persons OF wealth