Barre evening telegram. (Barre, Vt.) 1898-19??, 1899-04-13
BANK BOOKS
EVIDENCE,
Judge IiiddIe Decides to Admit Them
In the Quay Trial.
DEFENSE TAKES EXCEPTION.
No Decision Regarding the Admissi-
biIity of the Red BOOk-HnyNvoOd's
Letter to President NcMnnes
Allowed RS Evidence.

admissibiliLy of the books of the Peo-
pies bank IS evidence in the Quay trial
Judge Biddle decided that the books of
the bank are admissible as evidence.
He stated that he was not satisfied,
however, that the red book" was prop
er testimony against Senator Quay,
since il was not found among the reglI-
lar bank books. Ii has not yet been reg
ularly offered in evidence. and the ques-
ton of its dmissihility will be decided
when it is presented,
Counsel for Mr Quay filed an excep-
tion to the ruling of the court on the
admitted documents
When court convened. District Attor-
ney Rothel mel began his reply to MI.
Watson, urging the admission of the
books of the bank His first point was
that all manner of criminal charges are
established and proved by circumstan-
tial evidence. the crime of conspiracy
being frequently proved in this way.
NIr. ROthermel bore strongly on the con-
tinued payment of interest on the COM
monWealth's deposit in the Peoples
bank to Senator Quay. He affected to
prove by letters and kilograms that Mr..
Quay was borrowing money from the
bank for the purchase of stock and that
he paid no interest on these moneys.
This continued loaning of money Mr..
Rothermel contended. was in further
ance of the conspiracy between Cashier
Hopkins, State Treasurer Haywood and
Senator QuAy. He first took up the pc
rod for six months ending October.
1897. when the commonwe ealth's deposits
varied from $4,000 to S56500O. During
this time. he said, Mr.. Quay had loan
of S1S5,000 and paid no interest.
The Red Book.
He proposed to show by the writing
in one of the books-the now famous
red book that Hopkins had carefully
computed interest ON the amount of this
deposit not used by Quay. which in
terest was divided into three parts, two
of which were deposited respectively to
the credit IF Haywood and Quay. the
remaining part going. it is alleged to
G. II. Mckee of Pittsburg. He proposed
to show the very scheme, he said, which
was adOpte to conceal the operation
from the other clerks of the bank.
Mr.. Watson of Mr., Quays counsel re-
piled briefly to the district attorneys
ARK uT1ltUt. IL uItW luc dtltlltl'li III
the court to the points he raised Tues
day:
First.-That the guilt of Haywood.
Hopkins al | others is not under dis
cussion in this case, the two named be-
ing dead and the others not under in
dictment.
Second. - That in the indictment
against Mr.. Quay he is charged with
using state funds when under the law
state money deposited in a bank be
comes the property of the bank. and
consequently the defendant cannot be
tried on that charge.
hird--That the books are not admis
sible as competent to prove what the
commonwealth contends they will
prove. as they We're made by clerks who
knew nothing about their puA'ose and
that they We're not authorized by Sena-
tor Quay.
The testimony Of co-Consplrator il
necessary, he contended to convict a
man of the charge of conspiracy; books
are not co-conspira tors. All of the en-
tries in the red book" he said, con-
stitute evidence of what Hopkins did.
not what Quay did.
more OulecIIoUS ny thc IJtIeHNe.
After Judge Biddle had given his de-
cison a recess was taken. Then Mr..
Rothermel lead the letters which We're
written to Hopkins by Mr.. Quay and
which have been printed, giving the
cashier instructions how to proceed in
certain stock transactions and request
ing him in some Instances to obtain the
money necessary to purchase other
stock To each of these letters the de-
fense formally objected on the ground
that they are irrelevant under the in
dictment. Objection was overruled and
an exception noted in each instance.
Argument between counsel followed
the offer of the letter dated July 81.
1896. from State Treasurer Haywood to
President McManeS of the bank and
found in the Hopkins desk, the defense
ohiecting on the ground that Haywood
was dead and was not defendant and
that It was inadmisSible because of the
statute of limitations.
Theletter i'm question advises the bank
that upon the granting of loan of
500 600 to Richard r. Quay the state
,l,nosit will he increased from $500, 900 to
5000 600 and not reduced until the Quay
debt is ,,aid. Accompa nying the letter
is a note for 800 900 signed by state
Senator Arthur Kennedy and Richard
r. Quay and indorsed by Senator Quay
and Mr.. Rotherm"l proposes to sho"
from the minute book Of the bank that
the directors agreed to make the loan
upon the production of a certain letter
from Haywood, the letter being the one
IL, question. Mr. Ruthermel said the
note was not paid until after the failure
of the bank in 1898. The judge admitted
the letter.
George 5. Graham, who was district
attorney when the prosecution was hrst
brought against Mr.. Quay, was put on
+he stand. He identified two kilograms
sent by Quay to Hopkins. which he said
Mr.. Quay admitted having sent to the
cashier. One of these is the plum tree
telegram, which reads:
IF you wi. buy and carry thousand