The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-04-18
QUAYS CASE TO
REACH THE JURY
But Some Rulings Favor
the Defense.
EVIDENCE IS SHUT OUT
BUT AN EXPERT PERMITTED TO
REFRESH HIS MEMORY.
One Decision by Judge Biddle, the
Ex-Senator's Attorneys Claim,
Practically Rules Out Figures
Prior TO November, 1896.
Special Dispatch to The Call.

PHILADELPHIA, April 17.-Meyer
Goldsmith, the commemorative &C
countant, 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 witness
for the prosecution and it is through
him that all of the documentary evil
dence is to be presented. This wit
ness has examined the banks books
thoroughly, and he came into court
this morning with a number of type
written sheets containing figures that
he gathered from the various books, re-
lating mainly to the deposit of the
State Treasurer and the account of
Senator Quay. He swore to the cor
rectness of his work and then the Dis
trict Attorney formally offered the pa
per IN evidence.
This was objected to by the defense on
the ground that such a paper is not testi-
mony. 1t was insisted that the books
themselves should be placed before the
witness and his statements uttered from
what he saw entered n them The Judge
decided in favor of the defense thus Civ
ing that side the first comfort it has ex-
perienced since the trial began. The de-
b..
The paper was practically in evidence
witness Goldsmith using its contents in
framing his answers to the District Attor-
neyS questions. When the QUAY LAWYERS
objected to this they were met by the
Judges ruling that while the paper could
not be used as sworn evidence the wit
ness might use it to refresh his memory
One effect of all this was to make it
certain that the case will now go to the
jury, there having been some doubt on
| this point up to the decision to admit all
(rnl6GT1Nfth mil how
Just before the close of the days pro-
ceedings there was another ruling by
Judge Biddle in favor of the defense which
may have an important bearing on the
future of the case The statute of limita.
tions has been pleaded time and again
| by Senator Quay'S lawyers as a bar 10
commonwealth AS Mr.. Quay was indict-
ed on November II, 1898, the two years al
| lowed by the statute for prosecution
would extend back only to November II
1896. On this basis Mr.. Watson has fire.
quently urged Judge Biddle to exclude
mention of transactions dating back to
1885, when Mr.. Quay was State Treasurer.
The court has uniformly held. in effect
that the statute of limitations does not
affect the evidence, but does affect 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 this the corroborative evidence OF
the previous years should certainly be adj
mitted. Judge Biddle decided against the
commonwealth and the Quay lawyers
were very happy. He ruled that the evil
dence should be confined to the conspiracy
alleged and not relate to some other con
spiracy.
1t is interesting to note that there was
every indication that the Judge was in
clined to rule against Mr.. QUAY when
Mr.. Watson, who has a suave, persuasive
style, got into another little speech SINH
lar to several he had made during the
day, and begged the court to consider the
proint that the prosecution had so far
failed to show a specific conspiracy and
that this should be done before it went
The Judge took this view and ruled ac-
cordingly. The lawyers for the defense
claimed that the decision practically rules
out the figures prior to November IT,
1896. Mr.. Rothermel says it's effect will
be to prevent him from introducing much
of the evidence he hoped to present.