New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-04-21
nT1AY IN A JURY'S HANDS.
nrrENCE PRESENTED NO EVIDENCE
AFTER DEMURRER WAS DENIED.
.pcr-MENr BY COUNSEL FOR AND AGAINST
THE DEFENDANT-JURY LOCKED UP
AFTER BEING OUT SEVEN HOURS.

ouav was placed In the hands of the Jury At
o'clock this afternoon, and. verdict had been
cached by 10 o'clock at night the Jury was locked
~, until morning There was no intimation other
,han mere rumor. as to the attitude OF the Jury
rhe generally expressed opinion Of those who have
followed the trial since its beginning on Monday
Of last week. is that the verdict will be an
scouttal. Many. however look for disagree
ment There are few who express the belief that
verdict OF guilty will be given.
To-day's proceedings were confined entirely TO
argument and speeches by counsel the defence de-
e,ding TO present no testimony. Mr.. Watson be-
can the day by requesting that the case be with
drawn from the jury and verdict Of not guilty
rendered. He contended that the Commonwealth
had utterly failed TO make out a case against Mr.
Quay Judge Bddle determined the issues were
those for jury TO decide, and he ruled that 1t be
zone through with in the usual way
The defence to-day opened its part Of the pro-
ceed,ngs in the trial Of ex-senator Quay on the
charge OF conspiracy by moving that the court
withdraw the case from the jury and render
verdict Of mot guilty" In support OF this motion
David T Watson made a long argument to the
effect that the DisrictAttorney had utterly failed
10 prove his case. and he moved that the court
strike from the record the statements produced
from the books Of the bank because they failed to
connect NJ S. Quay with a conspiracy. He also
moved 20 strike out the red book" the same
grounds The same motion made with ref
erence 10 the letter Of July 81 1896, from Treasurer
HAYWOOD to President Mechanics. Of the bank
agreeing TO loan &c r. r. Quay. and the minutes
OF the bank directors with regard thereto. the
ground being that this evidence relates TO transac-
ton with which NJ. S. Quay was not connected
Another point raised was that Goldsmith. the
Commonwealth chief witness. was not an ex-
merit and that instead Of testifying to what the
books disclosed he evolved theory from infer
ences and partly from outside information.
ROthermel In reply to Mr.
Watson's argument. declared that the Common
wealth had proved the conspiracy completely with
In the lines 10 which the Court limited II. namely
the two years antedating November IT, 1898. He
said the letters Of Senator Quay TO Hopkins were
proof Of the conspiracy. was also the fact that
for the six months ending October 81 1897. Senator
Quay had the use Of sls5000 without interest.
Judge Biddle said there presented to him.
first. demurrer to the indictment. second, de-
murrer 10 the evidence. AS 10 the first he would
say nothing. the question had already been de-
cided by a Judge Of the Philadelphia court. Re-
garding the second demurrer the Judge said he
not in position to discredit the testimony
offered by the Commonwealth and he would there
fore allow the case TO go to the jury for them to
decide
NO EVIDENCE FOR QUAY PRESENTED.
There buzz in the courtroom over this de-
cision, adverse to the defence and then the Quay
lawyers held a consultation, after which MI.
Shields made the announcement that the defence
would offer no testimony whatever and would at
once proceed TO address the jury. In order to save
time Mr.. Shields offered to waive the right to
make the opening speech. II the Dstrct-Attorney
agreed he said he would allow the Distrct-Attor-
ney 10 go on with h!s speech. and he would follow
All this agreed to. and Mr.. Rotherme al once
began his attempt to convince the jury that ne
has established the guilt Of Senator Qauy. The
crime he said was that of conspiracy. and being
born In secrecy was therefore difficult to prove
1t must invariably be proved by the acts OF the
conspirators, as 1t almost impossible to get
the statement Of one of the consplrators. coming
20 the relation Of Mr.. Quay politically to State
Treasurer Haywood. he indicated that II the state
Treasurer received interest from the cashier ana
Mr. Quay the interest on $4,000 from the CASHIER
the natural inference that these men had en-
tered into a conspiracy. There might be no dlrect
evidence he continued. but there should be no
doubt that conspiracy was conceived and carried
out
Mr. Rotherne read Mr.. Quays letter to Cashier
Hopkins directing the purchase of nine hunoreo
shares Of Metropolitan stock. This, he argued. was
unlawful because the purchase was made with
bank money. and no interest was charged
The red book" he designated as uninteigible IN
itself but connected with the other books OF the
bank he asserted that 1t was the key to the PROOF
81 the charges The District-Attorney laid great
stress upon the fact that the red DOCK came
into existence in 1891 colncident with the passage
whom he argued. Hopkins would wish to Keep MS
Illicit transactions secret He called the jurys at
tention 10 the memorandum paper found IN Cashier
Hopkinss desk which, he declared, indicated IN
terest on call loans appropriated by Hopkins 10 pay
interest on State funds to Haywood, and was
therefore further circumstantial proof OF the con-
spiracy.
The District-Attorney. in concluding referred TO
the resolution of the Board of Directors on August
g. 1896 authorizing loan of 100000, alleged 10 DE
Endorsed by Mr. Quay. provided a certain let'er
could be obtained. He then read the Haywood let
ter to President McManes Of the bank, indicating
that $1,000 of State money would be deposited IN
the hank II 10 r r. Quay was loaned similar
amount and that it would not be removed until the
loan was paid.
ARGUMENT IN DEFENCE.
A. s. L. Shields made the argument for the de-
fence At the outset he took up the fact that the
case Of the prosecution built on the testimony
OF experts and quoted an opinion OF the Supreme
Court that he tendency is TO call experts TO TESTIFY
TO ready made opinions" TIKI. he declared. was a
prophecy covering the case In remarkable way
He argued that the political conspiracy against SEN
ator Quay was begun when Judge Gordon got from
the receiver OF the broken bank the books and let
tiers found in the dead cashiers private desk and
kept them in his possession for months. He went
over the improper use made Of these documents In
furtherance OF political ambition and hatred OF
Quay.
Mr. Shields denounced the photographing OF the
letters and the exhibition OF those photographs to
Mr. Guffey and John Wanamaker s proof positive
OF the conspiracy for the undong of Senator Quay.
Mr.. Shields took up the plum tree telegram and
directed whitening sarcasm against the smaness
Of the minds Of the men who would this docu-
ment against public in view OF the fact that
Senator Quay had more than $4,000 OF his own
money deposit and that $4,000 of this was used
as margin In the transaction
Mr. Shields pointed out that the letter written by
State Treasurer Haywood on July 81 1896 proms-
ing 10 increase the State deposit II loan was
made to r. r. quay, was addressed to James Nc
not political conspiracy ne ssked why was not
Of Senator Quay began? He took up the Red