The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-04-18
WILL co TO THE JURY
Story of Quay's Stealings Told
by an Expert.
A MILLION IS INVOLVED
Quay Fears a Searching Investigation
and Has Plsaded the Statute Of
Limitations-A Point for
the Defense.


damaging to the defendants side of the
case. Goldsmith is the main witness
for the prosecution, and it is through
| him that all of the documentary evil
! dence is to be presented. This witness
! has examined the banks books thor
! oughly, and he came into court this
| morning with a number of typewriter
| sheets containing figures that he gath
cred from the various books, relating
mainly to the deposit of the state
treasurer and the accounts of Senator
| Quay. He swore to the correctness of
his work and then the district attorney
| formally offered the paper in evidence.
This was objected to by the defense on
| the ground that such a paper is not
| testimony
1t was insisted that the books them
| selves should be placed before the Wit
| ness and his statements uttered from
| what he saw entered in them. The
| judge decided in favor of the defense.
Although the defense has apparently
gained this point, the paper was prac-
tically in evidence, witness Goldsmith
using it's contents in framing his an
| swers to the district attorneys ques-
| tions. When the Quay lawyers OBJ
jected to this they We're met by the
| judges explanation that while the pa
| per could not be used as sworn evil
| dence, the witness might use it to re-
| fresh his memory. One effect of all this
was to make it certain that the case
| Will now go to the jury, there having
been some doubt on this point up to
| the decision to admit all that Goldsmith
might have to say. Just before the
| close of the days proceedings there was
| JnIpp
of the defense, which may have an i'm
| portant bearing on the future of the
| case. The statute of limitations has
| been pleaded time again by Senator
| Quay's lawyers as a bar to much of
| the testimony presented by the COM
| monwealth. AS Mr. Quay was indicted
on Nov. II, 1898, the two years allowed
| by the statute for prosecution would
| extend back only to Nov. II, 1896. On
| this basis Mr.. Watson has frequently
urged Judge Biddle to exclude mention
of transactions dating back to 1886,
when Mr.. Quay was state treasurer.
| The court has held in effect that the
| statute of limitations does not affect
| the evidence, but does affect the crime.
| Judge Biddle decided against the COM
monwealth and the Quay lawyers were
very happy He ruled that the evil,
dence should be confined to the con-
Spiracy alleged and not relate to some
| other conspiracy.
1t is interesting to note that there
was every indication that the judge was
inclined to rule against Mr.. Quay when
Mr.. Watson, who has a suave, per-
| suasive style, got into another little
speech, similar to several he had made
during the day, and begged the court
to consider the point that the prosecu-
ton has so far failed show specific
conspiracy and that this should be done
before it went into the general ques-
ton of conspiracy. The judge took this
view and ruled accordingly. The law
yers for the defense claimed that the
decision practically rules out the fig
ures prior to Nov. II, 1896. Mr.. Rother-
mel says it's effect will be to prevent
him from introducing much of the cyl
dence he hoped to present.
All day long Mr.. Goldsmith read out
figures taken from the bank books en-
bracing the various settlement periods
of six months each dating back to Oct
81, 1892, showing the amount of the
state deposit, the amount loaned to
Senator Quay during each six months,
the amount allowed the state treasurer
for that amount, apparently not set
aside for Senator Quay's use, the
amount of interest, if any the senator
paid on his loans, and the amount of
money used to purchase stock for him.
The deposit during the years mentioned
ranged from $1,200,000 to $1,400, 900.
Senator Quay's loans were shown to be
as great as $6S0000 in one period of six
months. While all these figures were
going in, counsel for Senator Quay sat
silent and motionless, listening to the
monotonous questions and answers.
This was in pursuance of an under
standing that the defense objected to
every answer; that the objection was
overruled and an exception noted. This
is for future use in a higher court, if
necessary. Only Mr. Shields felt con-
strained to enter an earnest protest
against a witness being permitted to
place a mans liberty in jeopardy by
making such monstrous statements,
based merely on conjecture.
There is no doubt that nearly all of
the expert deductions and figures were
obtained from the red book" about
which so much has been said. and
against the introduction of which the
Quay counsel made such vehement but
unavailing objection.
The trial opened this morning with
Meyer Goldsmith, the commonwealth's
expert accountant, on the stand. The
first question was relative to Gold
| smiths Identification of a paper show
| ing the result of his examination of the
| bank books. The district attorney Of
| fered the paper in evidence, but was
| met by objections from the defense.
| Judge Biddle sustained the objection
on the same rule of procedure that eX-
| cludes a deposition. The effect of this
| decision is to require the physical eX-
| animation of all entries in all the
| books.
| The defense objected to the witness
| disclosing what the books showed with
| respect to the commonwealth deposits
| for the period ending Oct u, 1897. The
| objection was overruled and witness
said loans to Quay during that period
| were $1S5,S55. Witness was then asked
| how much stock the books showed pur-
chased for Quay during that period and
| he answered S143,200.
''State whether the books show that
| Quay paid any interest on those loans?"
| asked the district attorney.
Obiecte6 to and phiectioD overruled