Barre evening telegram. (Barre, Vt.) 1898-19??, 1899-04-12
EVIDENCE BY BARLOW.
Bank Receiver Testities In the Quay
Conspiracy Case.
HOW HE GOT THE RED BOOK,
Tells Circumstances of His Breaking
Open Cashier Hopkins Private
Dcsk-Judge Gordon Also
on the Witness Stand.

Philadelphia, April 1.-THE trial Of
eX-Unted States Senator Quay OF,
charges of conspiracy began in earnest
| when one witness after another was
| called by the commonwealth to tell
what each knew about the case.
David T. Watson of Pittsburg was the
| first of Mr.. Quay's counsel to arrive.
| Five minutes before court opened the
ex-senator and his son Richard came
in unaccompanied Mr., Quay was smil-
ing, and his features bore hopeful ex-
| preston as he responded to the greet
| ings of a few political and personal
| friends In the courtroom.
| Thomas w. Barlow, the rec yer of
| the bank, who identified the books and
papers found in the bank upon assum-
Ing his duties, was cross examined by
Mr.. Shapley of counsel for Mr.. Quay.
Mr.. Shapley had not proceeded far
with the cross examination before his
line of questions apparently indicated
his purpose to prove that the whole
fabric of the charges against Mr.. Quay
was the result of 81 conspiracy. After
bringing out the fact that Mr.. Barlow
was assistant to former District Attor-
ney Graham during the time he acted
as receiver and was busy with other du-
ties the witness was told to tell all the
circumstances of his removal of certain
letters, papers and books from the pri-
vate desk Of Cashier Hopkins. Among
these books Is the one known as 1.-The
red book" which the prosecution al
leges shows that Hopkins computed in
terest on state funds which he deposit
ed to Mr.. Quay's credit The papers also
included the Quay letters. among them
the plum tree document.
Got u Tip From Harrisbura,
Mr.. Barlow in reply said:
"On March 20 a person in Harrisburg
whom did not then and do not now
know spoke to me in this city over the
long distance telephone. He said, I
want to say to you an attempt will be
made tonight to take certain documents
out of Hopkins desk, so they had better
be taken by you. AS a result of this 1
went to the bank. accompanied by po-
liceman, broke open the desk and took
them out"
The witness said he notified Judge
Gordon, then one of the common pleas
Judges of his intention, the latter being
private and confidential adviser to
James McManes, president of the bank |
For about three hours that night he |
left the documents in the possession of |
Judge Gordon in a trust company's Of |
flee. Afterward these papers We're vir- |
tually in Judge Gordon's custody until |
early in September.
Further on Mr. Barlow explained that
Mr.. McManes had agreed to pay the
debts of the bank. and as Judge Gordon
was his friend he considered it perfectly
proper that the judge should know of |
the contents of the books and papers
Mr.. Barlow denied knowledge of the
of the Quay letters. He
denied knowing that before he got the
message from Harrisburg Judge Gordon
had opened the desk and examined it's
contents. He denied positively that
Judge Gordon was present when he
broke open the cashiers desk.
Mr.. Shapley put a long line Of ques-
ions to the witness, the obvious design
being to sustain the contention of the
defense that the memorandum books
md letters taken from a private desk
we're not bank property and therefore
lot admissible as evidence in this case.
Judge Gordon Testihcs.
Judge Gordon was the next witness.
lie identified the papers and books that
lad been placed in his possession by the
eceiver OF the bank and said they are
in the same condition now
Is when he received them. Mr.. Shields
onducted the cross examination. Judge .
GORDON said he did not gain his knowl- =.
dge of the papers in his capacity as
ounsel for Mr.. McManes, but as his
intimate personal friend.
who was the first person you showed ,
he papers tor
THE man who advised me of their j..
xistence, David Martin" =
"Who was the next person." :
John Wanamaker."
Were they in his custody?"
mo; he never had them"
who else saw them % :,
Mr.. Orr of Harrisburg and Mr. Har- =
ls personal friend, in my office. They :,
ad them in their possession for the :,
urpose Of photographing them"
Mr.. Gordon denied that he had placed
ne papers in the hands of District At
orney Graham at any time. He denied !.
lso that he took the letters to New :,
ork and exhibited them to Mr.. Guffey >.
nd Mr.. Wanamaker there. Mr.. Shields -
ndeavored to show a connection be- :,
Heen Judge Gordons gubernatoria. -
and his possession of letters IT
compromising to Senator Quay, but his =,
uestions We're ruled out. :.
The witness by way of explanation :.
lated that although he had testified e,
lat he had not shown the letters to Mr..
uffey In New York he desired to saw
lat on one occasion, while coming from !
ew York to Philadelphia on a Sunday 81,
orning in May last he had in his pook- Al
three Of the letters Of Senator QUAY a
nd had shown them to Mr.. Guffey. a,
his was the only occasion when Cuff Il,
y saw them, and he only saw three of Of
lie SO letters and kilograms of the a,
uays and Haywood. tc
A. L. Tabor, who was the teller of the HI
INK, was placed on the stand to iden- 3.
fy the Quay letters and kilograms. OF
he first Of the famous letters was Of
red In evidence. AT this juncture re.
rs was taken. When court recon
med, the defense entered a vigorous
position to the admission of the let
RI. kilograms and books on the ground
at they were not proper testimony. -,
Mr.. Watson opposed the admission of
e proposed evidence. It was evident
pm his argument that the defense will
fterly oppose the consideration of the