Evening star., 1899-04-13
State Trying to Get It in Evidence in
Quay Trial.
OBJECT OF CROSS EXAMINATION
Bookkeepers and Accountants of
the Bank Testify.
DEFENDANT NOT UNEASY

tion of entries in the more than 100 books
of the Peoples Bank, through the expected
inability of counsel to decide upon plan
to pick out certain books and thus save
time, responsible for light attendance
at the opening hour.
Mr. Quay arrived early and still wore the
same look of unconcern. He busted him
self for about five minutes in looking over
some mail. Counsel in both sides informed
Judge BiddIe that they had agreed upon a
plan regarding the identification of the
entries in the mass of books, which would
save considerable time. In pursuance of
this all the books were brought into the
court.
a. l.. Taber, receiving teller of the bank
testified to the period of time in which he
made entries in the banks book, when, re-
spectively bookkeeper and receiving teller.
Under cross-eXamination by Mr.. Shields,
the witness said Mr. Hopkins made entries
in the cash books, general ledger, discount
book, foreign and domestic bill books and
cashiers check book. The books are in
complete. More than fifty dating prior to
1895 are missing. Mr.. Shields intimated
that they had been burned.
Leading Up to "Red Book"
1t was evident from the district attor-
ney's questioning that he was leading to a
connection between the red book which
has not yet been admitted and the other
books of the bank. The lawyers for the
defense were on the alert and every ques-
ton leading in this direction was fought
against.
Mr.. Taber would not swear to the cor
rectness of deposit slip amounts entered by
MIN as bookkeeper except he had entered
them as received.
Upon redirect examination the district
attorney brought out the fact that all de-
post entries made during his tenure as re-
ceiving teller were correct. Mr.. Taber
then went over the list of missing books.
These were of a large variety, and We're
principally memorandum books. No es-
pecial significance seemed to be attached
by the defense to the fact that the books
are missing
Keepers, was next sworn. He gave SUBJ
stantially the same line of testimony as
the previous witness, stating his profess
sional knowledge of the manner in which
entries We're made in the books Mr.
W oodruTs cross examination followed in
the line of the previous witness eXamin-
atlon 1t developed that the witness had
charSe or the ledger in which Mr.. Quay's
deposits were entered from 1891 to the end
of 1879. He never, far as his knowledge
went, knew Mr.. Quay to have a deposit
book
Edward r. Marsh receiving teller of the
Peoples Bank from 1915 to 1896 and paving
teller from 1S!H until the bank closed was
the next witness. From 1891 until the
failure he had charge of the general ledger
cash book. He testified to the correctness
of all entries relative to his duties as re-
ceiVing and paying teller. Referring to the
general ledger cash book, the witness said
the entries there Were made from the
CHECKS themselves and not from memo
randa: Nothing additional developed dur
ing Mr. Marsh's cross-examination.
Had Charge of Individual Ledger,
Harry S. Walker, a bookkeeper for the
bank for about eight years, had charge of
the individual ledger from L to L. His en-
tries corresponded to the deposit slips and
checks received by him.
The witness, under cross-examination
said he had charge of Mr.. Quay's account,
put mad never seen the senator's deposit
book and did not know that he had one.
w. K. Goldenburg, bookkeeper who had
charge of Senator Quays account from
January, 1897 until the bank closed, veri-
ned the correctness of the books as far
a:. as ne was CONCERNED. He never saw a
After recess DIR. David Richardson, an
insanity expert, testified that Charles H
Austin, paying teller of the bank from
1870 to 1896 was in such Il mental condi-
ton as to make his testimony incompetent
Mr.. Taber was recalled and identified the
handwriting of Mr.. Austin in. the bank s
books and also the handwriting of William
Roberts, bookkeeper from 1888 to 1891, who
died in the latter year. Mr. Taber also
identified the handwriting of his fathe,
who died in 1894, and who was cashier from
1870 to 1891.
The witness under cross-exa mination
said that in addition to the books brought
into court this morning and those he had
said were missing, there were no other
books of the bank to his knowledge The
purpose of the question which brought this
answer was to have the witness Indicate
that he never knew the red book as a
book of the bank
The district attorney objected to the in
ference, whereupon Mr.. Shields said that
the defense would be satisfied if the com
monweaith would agree that the red book
was not to be considered at present among
the books then in the court room. The dis
trict attorney consented.
Hopkins the Whole Bank.
Clay Kemble, assistant cashier and a di-
rector of the bank was next called
In answer to question as to Hopkins
duties in the bank, he said: Hopkins was
the whole bank. Later on he said: Hop
kins had entire control of the call loans and
collaterals and nobody in the bank was ever
allowed to see them. 1 never saw them
Mr. kemble was handed the red book
by the district attorney, and he identified
some of the writing and figures as being
the work of Hopkins. He said however
that there were certain memorandum in
1t that We're not in the handwriting of
Hopkins. He said he had never seen the
book before. There fwas much legal and
verbal sparring between the district attor-
ney and Mr.. Shields, in which the judge
finally toolssa Hand.
in effort to move the proceedings
smoothly. The book is not yet in evidence,
and may never be- 1t was finally agreed
that the witness should indicate what he
recognized beyond question as Hopkins
handwriting, and what he thought was not
his writing.
This testimony was given in an under
tone within hearing of the lawyers and the
stenographer, but the jury did not hear a
word of it.
Mr.. Kemble's father, now dead estab-
lished the Peoples Bank in 1870, and he
was an interesting witness for that reason.
Mr.. Shields, in cross-examination, asked
him If he was. by reason of his family con-
nectioH biased in this case, explaining that
!, he wished to ascertain whether he had
anything to do with the prosecution.
Witness answered that he is not biased
and his family has nothing to do with the
prosecution.