The record-union., 1899-04-18
On the Stand All of Yesterdays Session in
the Trial Of Ex-senator Quay.
Judge Biddle Rules Adversely to
to the States Attorney on Two
Points, Which Brings Joy to
Quay's Lawyers, One Of Which
is Likely to Have an Important
Bearing ON the Outcome OF the
Case.

GHlIADElLGt1l<As fAp1ll -. n.y. -
Goldsmith, the Commemorative expert
accountant, was on the stand all day
in the trial of Senator Quay, making
statements Of facts that are apparently
damaging to the defendants side of
the case Goldsmith is the main wit
ness for the prosecution, and it is
through him that all of the documen-
tary evidence is to be presented. This
witness has examined the banks books
thoroughly, and he>cafne into court this
morning with a number of typewriter
sheets containing, figures that he gath
cred from the various books, relating
mainly to the deposit Of the State
Treasurer and the account of .ex- -Sena-
tor Quay He swore to the correctness
of his work, and then the District At
torney formally offered the paper in
evidence.
This was objected to by the defense,
on the ground that such paper is not
testimony. 1t was insisted that the
books themselves should be placed be-
fore the witness, and his statements
uttered from what he saw entered IN
them.
The Judge decided in favor of the de-
fensa, thus giving that side the first
tOHl1OIl II 0dS eAptIlSllNSu SiASC FIAAS
trial began. The defense has appar-
emily gained this point. The paper was
practically in evidence, Witness Gold
smith using its contents in framing his
answers to the District Attorneys ques-
tions. When the Quay lawyers objected
to this they We're met by the Judges
explanation that while the paper could
not be used. as sworn evidence, the
+a
memory.
One effect of all this was to make 1t
certain that the case will now go, to
the jury there having been some doubt
on this point up to the decision to ad-
init all that Goldsmith might have to
say
Just before the close of the day s
proceedings there was another ruling
by Judge Biddle I'M favor of the defense
which may have an important bearing
ON the future of the States case. The
statute of limitations has been pleaded
time and again by Senator Quay's law
yers as a bar to much of the testimony
presented by the Commonwealth. AS
Mr.. Quay was indicted on November
IT, 1898, the two years allowed by tbs
tatute for prosecution would extend
basis Mr. Watson has frequently urged
Judge Biddle to exclude mention OF
transactions dating back to 1886 when
Mr.. Quay was State Treasurer. The
court has uniformly held in effect that
the statute of limitations does not eff
feet the evidence, but does effect the
crime.
The District Attorney pointed out
that he alleges the defendants guilt
during the two years the law confines
him to. and to prove corroborative evil
dence of tha previous years should GER
tainly be admitted.
Judge Biddle decided against the
Commonwealth. and the Quay lawyers
were very happy. He ruled that tbs
evidence should be confined to the con-
spiracy alleged, and not relate to some
other conspiracy.
1t is interesting to note that there
was every indication that the Judge
was inclined to rule against Mr.. Quay,
when Mr.. Watson, who has a suave
persuasive style, got into another little
speech similar to several he had madt
during the day. and begged the court
to consider the point that the prosecu-
tion has so far failed to show a spe-
eiffc conspiracy. and that this should
be done before it went into the general
question of conspiracy The Judge took
this view, and ruled accordingly.
The lawyers for the defense claimed
that the decision practically rules out
the figures prior to November II, 1896
Mr.. Rothermel said it's effect will be
to prevent him from introducing much
of the evidence he hoped to present.