The Anaconda standard., 1899-09-16

merly worked for E. r. Mayer as a
| jeweler. Mr.. Kirk asked the witness
| II ne knew whether or not Thompson
| lived with a prostitute and Mr.. Con
| molly objected, saying that there was
no rule of evidence, either in English
German or Irish, permitting such q
| question. Mr.. Kirk changed the uues.
| ton to do you know Thompson's rep
| utation for truth, veracity and chas-
| tity?"
Mr.. Connolly again objected and the
| objection was sustained. Mr.. Connolly
| then asked, on cross-eXamination, if
the witness lived with woman not his
| wife. He replied that he did not.
l. F'latow, clerk for John Caplice &
| Co., testified to the bad reputation of
Thompson. Cross-examined, the wit.
| ness said he had worked for Z. F.
Mayer. Asked if he had not heard more
from the Mayors concerning Thompson
than from other people. the witness
said he could not tell. Asked if he was
relative of the Mayors, the witness
said he was a second cousin to Mrs.
Max Mayer.
Judge A. H. Barret testified to the
reputation of the defendant He had
known Mayer % years and knew his
reputation to be good. Witness was at
the defendants place for three months
III 1000 Sluuy liIS assay lliS. ne saw IL
lot of bullion brought there in August.
1t was laid on the floor in plain view
and no attempt was made to conceal
1t. Relative to the witness Thompson s
testimony regarding the defendants S
habit of preparing for the coming of
bullion by getting in coal, he said he
never saw more than a bushel carried
in at one time.
Adjournment was taken at this time
for the noon hour.
E. F. Mayer, nephew of the accused,
was called at the opening of the after
noon session. He denied the statement
made by Witness Thompson to the eff
feet that he had told him (Thompson)
that the bullion was stolen. He was at
the Mayer place Of business when the
bullion came on numerous occasions.
and with reference to the time Thomp-
son referred to when the bullion was
taken to the back door, witness said
he himself sent it around, as he did not
want it carried through the shop. He
denied the statement of Thompson that
preparations were made in advance foc
melting when it was known bullion was
coming.
The defendant took the stand as
the last witness and testified at great
length concerning the alleged irregular
transactions. He denied that he ever
had even suspicion that the bullion
was stolen. He said Boyd, who was
known to him as Boyle, represented
that he was mining near Philipsburg
The witness bought the bullion in the
regular course of business and never
gave a thought as to whether the man
was all right or not. He said he had
regular price of 40 cents an ounce that
he always paid Boyle for his bullion.
The defendant explained in detail the
various phases of the allegations
against him and Mr.. Connolly then took
up the cross-examination during
which he called attention to entries in
the bullion book, showing where the
witness received 4,200 ounces of bullion
from Boyd in one day, and asked:
You paid Boyd 40 cents an ounce for
this bullion, or about ST. 800, and at this
rate your profit was about $500, was It
not?"
The witness admitted that was true.
Wasn't that a pretty good profit?'
asked Mr.. Connolly.
Yes; it was a good profit; good
thing replied the witness.
And didn't the fact of this bullion
coming there as it did and Boyle being
willing to accept 40 cents an ounce when
he could go into the open market and
get so cents, or nearly that. arouse your
suspicious?' Mr.. Connolly asked.
The witness replied that he never
After the oss-examination was COM
pleted Paul V. Fusz, president of the
Bimetallic company, was called and
questioned by Mr.. Kirk concerning the
time the Bimetallic mill was closed
down in 1897 and 1885, He said the mill
was closed from April, 1897, to May,
1898.
Mr.. Connolly, on cross examination,
asked the witness if he had offered c.
H. Thompson anything, any bullion or
anything else, for his testimony in this
case. He said he had not.
superintendent Zeigler was recalled
and asked the same question. He de-
MED ever offering Thompson anything.
Mr. Kirk in his argument, dwelt up
on the improbability of the defendant
knowing the bullion he bought from
Boyd was stolen in view of the evil
dence that he made. no attempt to con-
ceal the bullion and entered the receipts
upon his book in the regular order of
business, and of his hitherto good char
acter in the community.
Mr.. Kirk made an eloquent argument
in behalf of the defendant after which
Mr.. Connolly spoke very briefly, point
scarcely have believed the bullion came
from an honest source; that Boyd was
a mining man, for if he was, he would
not be willing to give up third of his
bullion value to get it melted down.
At the close of Mr.. ConnoIly's re-
marks the court observed that he did
not think that the state had made 4
case and discharged the defendant