Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-12-09
A SENSATION SPRUNG,

After the News" report closed yes
terday afternoon there was somewhat
of sensation sprung when Frank H..
Clayton, the nightwatchman, who slept
in the postofilce building, was sworn.
He testified that he was awakened
from his sleep one night BY the sound
of voices In the postofllce followed by
the jngllng of money. AT first hs
thought that burglars had broken into
the p0stoflice, but upon hearing some
one laugh, whom he identified as Assist
ant Postmaster Rapp, he turned over
and went to sleep again.
Atty. Maglnnis asked witness whsn
this occurred and the answer wa. On
or about March |.
was 1t after or before the LIST Of the
month";" was the next question.
Il don't remember"
How many were In the room3'
Il could not tell exactly, There were
two or three"
did you recognize any other voice
excepting Rapp's?'
mo. Sir
How long were they In there?'
About 10 minutes
Did YOU hear anyone al the sste?'
Il did not"
What was said by the persons in
the r0om?"
'They spoke so low that couldn't
hear what they said
But YOU recognized Rapp's voice ?"
Yes sir; he spoke louder than the
Others"
What else did you hear2"
That was all. heard the voices,
and then ! heard them laugh. After
that | heard the money Jingle"
What woke you up?'
THE door slammed"
"And you thought that burglars were
in the Office"
Yes, sir; until heard Rapps voice."
Did you say anything TO them OF
go In the room?'
mo, sir. supposed they had d
right TO be In there, and | paid no
more attention to them"
Did you report the circumstance to
anyone"
Il spoke 10 Rapp about It the next
night"
did you say anything to anyone
else? ?"
mot then"
why didn't yOh?"
II was told not to-
Who else did you report the mat
ter to?"
ITO j. X. HerrIck and A. l.. Stone"
THIS AFTERNOON.
Continuing al o'clock, Mr.. Lppman
maintained that Meighan had not intro
duced In evidence single line Of de-
fence regarding the deficit in the money
order department. Counsel held that
Meighan on the morning Of April Is,
owed the government 81 lb532 on the
money order account and proceeded to
read from his notes to arrive at that
total. After citing number OF figures
% transactions that had been outlined
In the testimony, counsel turned his at
tention TO the postal department. He
maintained from documentary evidence
introduced that there was emphatically
a shortage and that Meighan had tried
To smother the same and mystify the
Jury with lot OF immaterial figures
by introducing payroll for the month
OF April There was no evidence intro
duced he declared, that these mail
clerks had been paid as inferred. True
checks had been drawn. but what good
were checks when witness admitted TO
the postofiice inspectors on that very
day they were drawn that he
had an overdran ct the bank. Atty.
Lippman concluded by saying that he
wanted the Jury to do their duty and
weigh the evidence which, he said.
pointed beyond any doubt that on and
before April Is. 1902 there had been a
shortage in the accounts OF the money
order and the postal departments "
the ogden postoitice.
THE DEFENSE.
Atty. Patterson's address to the jury
on behalf OF defendant was In an en-
tirely different vein. lie undertook to
leave figures severely alone and put IN
most OF his time getting on good terms
with the Jury. lie told them that fed
eral jurles were made Of decidedly bet
ter timber than state juries; IN fact
federal iuries were essentially the elect
who were honored. He also undertook
20 remove the impression that the Unit
ed States government was something
indennable way back IN Washinstn
that was omnpotent and never erred.
furthermore he said that the humblest
juryman was Just as much a part OF the
government as was the biggest federal
official. He affirmed that the govern
men had not proved that the money
was taken that II was taken by
Meighan; that It was knowingly taken.
and that Il was taken with the intent
10 defraud the government. all OF
which must be proved ere Melghan
could be convicted. The evidence he
ayerred was entirely documentary and
evidence Of induction. He maintained
that there was n great deal Of differ
ence between being civilly and Grimm
ally liable for deficit The one was
plain stealing. while the other was en-