The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1899-10-06

Wcscott had such an oxtravagant aHec-
lion and regard for his son-in-law as 10
Ipduce him to couade 10 him so great
trust and 10 make him the doner Oh suoi.
large sums OF money then the nd,ula'
suggestion would be that he would DC
interested intensely I'm the result OF VIZ
trial. in which the honor as well as tne
liberty. of his son-iu-law were involved
one would naturally think that father-
in-law. 90 regardsul OF his son-ih-la"
interests. would be quick 10 rush 10 niS
defence and by his oath TO add comm
nation TO the story which. II true, "ou'"
exculpate him from these serious chdtBes'
1t il said that Captain Carter maoe
great efforts TO secure the attendahee ol
Mr. Wesc0tt as a witness, but there "
no proof OF IT, There is no evidence 'nS1
ne wrote him. or requested him ID any
wise To appear as a witness before '"o
court-martial. -.
.'rhe Inference IS that his testimony
would not have benefited captain Cartc'
If he had appeared Such IS the Fresisl'
Gle conclusion on. therefore. hndlnS 1l,a'
the ono witness in all the world VINO
could have created conviction IN ,nc
minds OF the court as to the truth oil tni9
extraordinary story withh3lds hli'9O",
and that there is no satisfactory eNiue".c
that the defendant made any eNet''o" ~
produce him. We must conclude that MS
testimony would not have been usetui.
~rt is also noteworthy that Wescott can
celed the power OF attorney when carter
held almost Immediately after the accuse
tion against Carter became public III the
fall OF 1891 -. s..
The Attorney-General then shows py
an anai,.sis of Captain Carter teSu-
nonv that I'm his dealings with ms la1iei,
in-law. he rendered strict account 10 tna'
gentleman and that Carters luh"S ia ~,
Union Trust Company were III eN'oss VI
those .of Mr.. Wescott during the ..ut,
time that he had control OF the ld''o'
affairs ..c,o>.
"The testimony" he adds. docs 10.
strike me az that of man pos5eSHeu oi :
clear idea Of the truth and Determined ~
ton IL but rather as % clever evasion "'
one who is endeavoring artitcially 10 ac-
count FOR the possession ol hloneS' D
ed from other source -,.,..,,-
MIR. Gri-gs also mentions other clryunl
stances which he pronounccs susPiSioI9,
including the fact that many OF III
checks paid to the contractors "eio
l.rted I'M cash over the counter ~ ".
sub-Treasurv ard the circumstance una,
carter was present In New YORK on 5uiS
tSQ7 when The large checks were ue-
rvered ~ Csvnor on that date. and thal
he w. on many other occasions, from
1882 10 l,91. present IN New holk Mn0'
payments We're made 10 the coitfae
He presents a statement sno"ins
denosits OF currency made by captain
C..r,er si,,ultsneouslv with the cashing OF
checks given 10 the contractors III NJ"
York. ... l.,,a,ai
saws. "Carter's statement OF the goa Ger
tidcates contained IN Mr.. Westcott sale san.
denosit box. To the amount of over >lV''v''
* such an extraordinary story an" 30 "'
consistent with the methods or pusinesS
man. such as Mr. Westcott Is tesulled w.
he that t staggers credulity- II tl"'
money was there iu box to Whlch zap
tain Garter had access, IL Is more PROP
sbf. that ne nut 10 there using this means
IN withhold temporarily from MS own DAMN
o.oo,,nt large sums which he had re-
ceived from other sources. Such a de-
vice AS that would De entirely consistent
with the theory of fraud and concealmeht
which Is maintained by the prosecution
sHREWD DEVICES.
c,,tain Carter is admittedly a shrewd
aud clever man and it is apparent from
a, examination Of these accounts that ne
has resorted TO various devices TO cover
NO his rrqcrs 7nd o0n'e'' 'N' 'Fne 'u'i''
ter Of his transactions. Whether this was
one of them or not. or whether the Whoie
story IS a fabrication cannot be deter
mined but In view Of AN the evidence con-
sidering the improbability or MS story
the failure 20 produce cOrrob0rative PROOF,
CONTINUED on Eighth Page)