The record-union., 1899-04-12


his duties, was cross-examined by Mr..
Shapley, of counsel for Mr.. Quay.
Mr.. Shapley's line of questions appar-
emily indicated his purpose to prove that
the whole fabric of the charges against
Mr. Quay were the result of a conspir-
acy. After bringing out the fact that
Mr.. Barlow was assistant to former Dis
trict Attorney Graham during the time
he acted as receiver, and was busy with
other duties, the witness was told 20
tell all the circumst ances Of his removal
of certain letters, papers and books
from the private desk of Cashier Hop
kinS. Among these books is the one
known as 1.-The red book" which the
prosecution alleges shows that Hopkins
computed interest on State funds which
he deposited to Mr.. Quay's credit. The
papers also included the Quay letters,
among them the plum tree document"
MIR. Barlow, in reply, said: ''On
March 18th a person in Harrisburg,
whom 1 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 docu-
ments out of Hopkins desk, so they
had better be taken by you AS a re-
suit of this I went to the bank, ac-
companied by policeman, 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 be-
ing private and confidential adviser to
James McManes, President of the bank.
For about three hours that night he
left the documents in the possession cf
Judge Gordon in a trust company's Of
flee. Afterward these papers were vir-
tually in Judge Gordon's custody until
early in September. 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
photographing of Quay letters for the
use of his political opponents. He said
he did not know that they had been
taken by Judge Gordon and shown to
David Martin, or that Judge Gordon
and John Wanamaa1er had taken them
to New York and shown them to DEM
ocratic National Committeeman James
McGuffey, in an effort to make Judge
Gordon the Democratic candidate for
Governor of Pennsylvania last year.
Mr.. Barlow denied knowing that be-
fore he received the anonymous tele-
phone message from Harrisburg, Judge
Gordon had opened the private desk
and examined the books and papers. He
thought State Banking Commissioned
Gilkeson had seen the documents prior
to their coming into his (Barlow's) pos
session. He stated that early in Sep
tember last he showed them to Attor-
ney General Mccormick in Harrisburg.
Mr.. Shapley asked witness if the At
torney General had not told him that
there was nothing in them on which
to base civa or criminal action.
The question was objected to by the
District Attorney, and the objection
was sustained.
Witness denied that any money or
securities of the bank had been in
possession of Judge Gordon. He also
denied positively that Judge Gordon
was present when he broke open the
cashiers desk
Mr.. Shapley put long line of ques-
tions to the witness, the obvious de-
sign being to sustain the contention of
the defense that the memorandum books
ldhOu 1IOlll llle private utSh were pll-
vate property and therefore not admis-
sible as evidence. This concluded the
oss-eXaminationJ
On redirect examination, Mr.. Barlow
said Banking Commissioner Gilkeson
had possession of Hopkins keys, and
had examined the contents of the pri-
vate desk two or three days before he
was appointed receiver The papers
in the desk were mixed up and in a
confusd condition. The red book
was handed to Mr.. Barlow, and he de-.
clared emphatically that it is now in
the same condition as when it came
into his possession.
Mr. Shapley endeavored to make the
witness say that there were among the
papers an envelope with a Harrisburg
postmark addressed to President Nc
Names which fits the letters from Treas
urer Haywood to the bank saying that
if loan of 100000 is made to Sena-
tor Quay's son, he will keep the State
balance at 100000 until the payment
of the loan.
The prosecution claims that although
the letter is addressed to President Nc
Names for purposes of formality, it was
sent to Cashier Hopkins direct, as had
been the custom of Mr.. Haywood.
Judge Gordon was the next witness
Judge Gordon identified the books and
papers that had been placed in his pos
session by the receiver of the bank, and
said they are undoubtedly in the same
condition now as when he received
them. Cross examined by Mr.. Shields,
Judge Gordon said he did not gain fls
knowledge of the papers in his capacity
as counsel for Mr. McManes, but as his
intimate personal friend.
-'Who was the person to- whom you
showed the papers?"
'"The man who advised me of their
existence, David Martin"
'Who next?"
"John Wanamaker. The books were
never in Mr. Wanamaker's custody. MI.
Orr, of Harrisburg, and Mr.. Harris, a
personal friend of the witness, had ths
papers in their possession for the pur-
pose of photographing them.''
Mr.. Gordon denied that he had placed
the papers in the hands of District At
torney Graham at any time. He denied |
also that he ever took the letters to
New York and exhibited them to Ma
tional Committeeman McGuffey and Mr.
WaEamaker there. Mr.. McGuffey had
seen only three of the thirty-six letters |
and kilograms of Quay and Haywood.
Mr.. Shields endeavored to show |
connection between the Judge Gordan |
Gubernatorial candidacy and his pos
session of letters comprising Senator |
Quay, but his questions We're ruled out |
Judge Gordon declared he never took |
a paper or anything else from the |