The Butte inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1901-1912, 1901-08-20

Under the characterization Of Attor>
ney Clark, Mr.. Kirkwald said that he
had not worked for Mr.. Leyson at tina
time Of the alleged appropriations, and
Of course did not know what the actual
state of the cash was then. His knoWl-
edge was confined to the books-to the
condition in which he found the ac-
counts. He said that the deposit might
have been made in checks partly. There
was deposit in the bank in August OF
$.S76. The witness could not say what
cash remained on hand in the store. He
could not tell from the books what cash
was in the drawer, notwithstanding
what the books showed. He said that
the books balanced day or so after the
time when they showed q deficit.
Argument for the State.
Judge Lindsay opened the arguments
in the case with a presentation of the
state side. He said that he would be
brief In the opening address.
The only defense which the defendant
had sought to make. Judge Lindsay
said. was plea Of his ignorance as a
bookkeeper and his overburdened state
in the position he occupied in the store
of Mr.. Leyson. But the evidence
showed. the attorney said, that these
excuses were insufficient for several
reasons. Long prior to the time when
he was hired by Mr.. Leyson he had
acted as cashier of restaurant at
Washington, and he had charge Of the
restaurants cash book ~niie so en-
ployed. Judge Lindsay laid particular
stress upon the fact that the defend
ant had testified that during that time
there had been no errors In his book
keeping, or, at least, no errors had been
reported to him.
Then the defendant had handled cash
| in New York for four months and no
| errors had been discove~ed IN his ac-
| counts then. The testimony showed
that the defendant had entered the en-
| ployment OF Mr.. Leyson as an en-
| graver in response to an advertisement
| in a newspaper Mr.. Leyson had tes-
| titled that Greene had represented to
| him that he was a good bookkeeper, ana
| that upon that representation he had
| permitted the later to take charge Of
| his books.
For two years Greene's work was
| good: no errors We're found In that
| period The populations had COM
| menced after two years OF correct serv-
ice. So the defense advanced was no
defense, Judge Lindsay declared. A
| ten year-old boy could add up col
umn of figures.
Plea For the Defendant.
| Attorney Clark, one Of the defendants
! counsel, addressed the court in behalf OF
| the latter. Mr.. Clark said that he hoped
he had the reputation of combining him.
self in his arguments to the evidence
| and the issues in a case, and that In all
his experience he had never seen an at
tempt to send a man to the penitentiary
on evidence so flimsy. He said that hi
had known County Attorney Breen by
! reputation for some time before tbs
Greene case opened, but that he now
knew hi mbetter than he had.
II challenge the state to prove that Mr.
Leyson ever lost dollar. Nothing ha'
been brought here to show that he eve.
lost a cent" Mr.. Clark declared.
He said that Greene had made errors
in his accounts. but that courts do no
let men be sent to prison on that basis
The state charged, Mr.. Clark aNerted
that the only defense that the defendan
had made was that he was Ignorant o
bookkeeping and over-burdened witt
work. That was not correct. The de
tense that the latter made was tn 1
there had been no proof that Mr.. Leyso!
|
had that there was no proof that Green
had stolen it.
In the first charge Of misappropriation
the attorney said, the only evidenc
brought against Greene was that he ha
made slip showing a deposit in tn
bank and that the deposit had neve
been made. Greene had explained hoy
press of work had often prevented hin
from making deposits for two or thre
days after making out deposit slips.
Mr.. Clark wanted to know If men wer
sent to prison on that proof. He sal
that Mr.. Kirkwald's testimony Shove
that the balances were correct after
ward: that the deposits were made latel
Mr.. Clark said that Mr.. Kirkwald ha
testified that he knew nothing of wha
cash balances were left in the stor
after deposits were made. and that h
knew nothing as to whether the $158 cor
stituting one of the sums Greene wa
J. charged with stealing was included
I bank deposit of 81, 800 made at abor
E the time Of the alleged embezzlemcnt {
y was left in the drawer in the store.
Closing Arguments.
! Judge Lindsay made the closing argu
. ment for the state. In this address h
answered. tue pOlAlS TdlScu ny MI. LIAR
f in detail. and made out full presents
!. ton Of the states case. He went int
the matters surrounding the alleged mi!
. appropriations very closely and exhau:
lively, and his argument was listened I
attentively by the court, who paid clos
y attention to the contentious Of both Law
4 yers.
!. At the conclusion of the argumen
Judge Nelson announced his intention
a taking the case under advisement.
e Orion Bros-Pianos and organs.