The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-10-04
George l.. Ramsey Is Technically
Under Arrest.
REFUSED TO SHOW BOOKS
Habeas Corpus Proceedings Instituted
in His Behalf-It Is Case to Be
Decided by the Supreme
Court.
Special Dispatch to the Standard.

cashier OF the Union Bank and Trust
company of Helena. is technically under
arrest for refusing to obey the order of
a notary public and bring before that
officer certain records, books and rec
his deposition in the libel suit of Fred
Whiteside against the Butte Miner. The
banker does not have to languish
in the county jail, and the question of
his innocence or guilt of contempt Of
the ruling of the notary will be passed
upon by the courts, habeas corpus pro-
ceedings having been instituted in his
behalf in the district court. The SUI
preme court will probably have to pass
upon the matter regardless of the de-
cision Of the lower court. Until the
courts have settled the question of the
authority of a notary to punish for
contempt witnesses refusing to produce
books called for in the taking of depo-
sitions of Helena bankers as to the
transactions of members of the legis-
lature with the Helena banks or deal
ings with w. A. Clark or his agents in
the way of furnishing large bills hon
oring checks and drafts, will probably
be suspended. That is the substance of
the proceeding commenced yesterday
Dt1OEe AIDGIL LOtU. WHICH were
to sudden halt when Cashier Ramsay
refused flat-footed to bring his books
into court.
Mr.. Loeb stated at the suspension of
the proceedings yesterday that he would
announce to-day his decision as to
whether he, as a notary or commission
er, could punish for contempt the fail
ure of the witness to obey the summons.
This morning at 10 o'clock he made
lyrr fln nf hit NV ic0t
of authorities and the conclusion ne
had reached. He announced that Mr..
Ramsay should comply with the re-
quest of Whiteside's counsel. AS pre-
dicted in to-day's Standard, the banker
refused to obey the summons. Before
the notary announced his decision. w.
S. Hartman, counsel for Mr.. Whiteside,
stated that for Mr.. Ramsay's benefit
he would say that the request for the
production of the books was not made
for the purpose of having counsel in
spect them. but for the assistance of wit
ness in refreshing his memory and 9TH
erwise to assist him in his testimony.
After E. c. Day had registered another
objection to the request for the books,
Mr.. Ramsay said he desired to explain
his testimony of yesterday as to the
accounts of three members of the legis-
lature, Messrs. Stevens, Day and Camp
bell.
II want to say in further explanation
of that reply" said the witness, that
the account of Senator Campbell con-
sisted simply of the deposit of his sal
airy warrants and checks for his ordi-
nary current expenses Judge Stephens
simply consisted of some returns from
some reports of ore which he had
shipped from his mine, and MI. Days
consisted simply of his personal ordin-
airy deposits, such as he had been MAX
ing for year. Now, I still refuse in
bringing the books of the bank into
court
Mr. Hartman-After the statement
we made this morning you still persist
in your refusal?
Mr.. Ramsay-Yes, sir.
Mr.. Hartman then renewed the re-
quest Of yesterday that the witness be
required to obey the order of the sub
poena and bring the books desired be-
fore the notary. Day objected and No
tary Loeb then announced his ruling
on the request to the effect that it
should be complied with. In announc-
ing his decision Mr.. Loeb said:
Il have examined the authorities TO
which my attention has been called by
counsel for the respective parties herein,
and have alseo made an independent in
vestgation of many cases not cited by
counsel A careful reading Of the au-
thorities has led me to the conclusion that
it Is not for The witness to decide for him
self the relevancy of questions PROFOUND
ed to him. There is no claim that the
questions involve any question of privi-
lege on the part of the witness, and no
such privilege is claimed as an excuse for
not answering. and it seems well settled
that whether the questions In other re.
spects are competent Is matter tor the
determination of the court on the trial
of the action in which the dispositions are
being taken. CEN parte Wickes, 18th Mon
tana 800 People VS.. Sheriff, 7 AAlb, Pr. 36
People VS.. Cassell. HILL 1904. Rapaige or
Contempts, Sec 66. 6s, 70. Proffatt on No
taries, 202)
my understanding of the question as i
Is presented is that there is no demand
made by the attorneys for the plainaf1
that the witness produce the books oil
the Union Bank and Trust company fol
their inspection. but that the witness
having testified that he is unable to fully
answer the questions propounded withou
the aid of the books, that the books BE-
produced in response to the subpoenas
so that the witness might testify there
from and aid himself thereby in hrs ties
timony. The request does MOI involve the
inspection of the books by the plaintiff
nor is this asked. The request woult
not seem unreasonable il it were made
Of an individual, and as said in the cast
of Wehtreim VS.. Continental Railway ant
Trust Co., 10 Fed. Tic. cited with approva
in Beach on Rival Corporations, Sec. SIS
ON principal it Is impossible to sugges
any reason why a corporation shall b'
privileged to withhold evidence which al
individual would be required TO produce.
1.-THE request not seeming unreasonable
and not contemplating the inspection o
the books by the plaintiff and only goins
so far as to ask that the books be pro
duced and used by the witness for th'
purpose of aiding his testimony in matter:
with reference to which he has testified
he is unable to answer without aid or I'M
books asked for, and to be used by him
and him alone. and not to be inspected D!
the plaintiff, it seems to me the reques
should be complied with
Mr.. Day renewed his claim that NJ
question had been propounded yester
day which the witness could not ansWe
and proceeded to read from the testi
mony relative to the inquiry apou
81 ,OOO- bills coming into the bank oe
| tween January / and June l, to Whlci
Ramsay had replied he could ansWe
providing the questions were conhhe'
| to members of the legislature. The 81