The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1899-04-19
QUAY HAS HIS INNINGS
Goldamith's Evidence Shaken by
Cross Examination,
STATEMENTS GREATLY MODIFIED


Or Explained Away by the Question
ing OF Lawyer shields-Facts Tend
ing to show That Amounts Charged
to Quay Were Really Loans to Others
Philadelphia, April 19.-The defense
had its innings yesterday In the trial
of Senator Quay and 1t made the most
of its opportunity. Expert Account.
ant Meyer Goldsmith, the common.
wealth's witness, was under scorch-
ing fire Of cross examination all day,
and the result thereof justifes the
opinion that the network of evidence
wrought by the prosecution from the
books OF the broken bank, tending to
show Senator Quay's guilty participa-
tion In the unlawful use Of the banks
money, was very much shaken by the
admissions the witness was compelled
to make under the skillful questioning
of Attorney A. s. l.. Shields. Nearly
all Of the apparently damaging on
tries attached to Senator Quay's name
or account in the bank, as testified to
on Monday. were explained away or
greatly modified by the statements of
the commemorative own witness.
Judge Biddle's ruling of Monday had
the effect Of combining testimony tend
Ing to show the existence of q con-
spiracy between Quay, Haywood and
Hopkins, as charged in the indictment,
to the two years ending No. II, 1898.
Lawyer Shields got from the witness
the admission that if Hopkins had
properly credited Senator Quay's &C.
count with amounts that belonged
there the books would show that at
the beginning Of the alleged conspir-
acy, Nov. II, 1896, the senator owed
the bank only 1926, instead of over
$4,000, as is alleged.
Taking up the allegation that Sena.
tor Quay had borrowed $1s5, 900 during
the settlement period" ending Oct.
81. 1897, the last settlement before the
bank closed, Mr.. Shields forced from
Goldsmith, piece by piece, facts tend
ing to show that in nearly Try in
stance the amounts charged = senator
Quay were really loans to other per-
sons, politicians mostly, for whom
Quay endorsed. Where there was q
definite loan to Senator Quay the re-
payment was clearly proven. In this
connection it might be we'll to say
that District Attorney Rothermel
claims that he has clearly established
the fact he started out to prove, name
ly, that 100000 of the state deposit in
the bank was set aside for the use of
Senator Quay, and whether he used 1t
himself or loaned it to others is not
material in proving the conspiracy.
Toward the close of the days pro-
ceedings Mr.. Shields asked Goldsmith
some questions which indicate that the
defense is about to attempt to prove
its contention that Senator Quay was
the victim of Cashier Hopkins, who,
they assert. used the name and ac-
count Of the senator, without the lat
ters knowledge, to cover his own
juggling with the banks funds. Hop
kins, they say, appears to have used
fictitious names for loans, presumably
to himself, as well as the name of Sen.
ator Quay. He had the reputation of
being heavy speculator in the stock
market, and the inference is that the
defense will attempt to prove that
Senator Quay had no knowledge what
ever of the alleged loans on his &C.
count.
Mr.. Shields put different conplex-
Ion on the entries in the red book"
by compelling the witness to admit
that many of the figures were not
proven by entries in the regular bank
books, but were the result of what
ne practically acknowledged to be his |
guesses' at the meaning of certain
figures written in the "red
book Goldsmith was still on the
stand when court adjourned for the
day.
Much of the sting was taken out OF
The famous shake the plum tree" tele-
gram by the statement that the pur-
chase of Metropolitan stock contem-
plated thereby was made with $4,000
'f Senator Quay's own money, his d.
poslt at that period exceeding $50 900,