Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-01-05
NEARING THE CLOSE
Watson Case to Go to the
Jury This Afternoon.
A RGUMEN rs TODAY
ATTORNEYS FOR THE DEFENDANT
MOVE FOR ACQUITTAL.
Court Overrules the Motion - Former
Auditor Petty Called as Witness
for the Defense.

James M. A. Watson. formerly a clerk in
the Office of the auditor of the District OF
Columbia, tried on the charge of embez-
cling about $4,000 from the District, will
very likely hear the verdict of the jury in
his case late this afternoon. The summing
up arguments of counsel to the jury were
begun shortly after lis o'clock, and the
understanding was that should the attor-
neys conclude their arguments by 8 o'clock
Justice Wright will deliver his charge to
the twelve men who are to decide the
question of the guilt or innocence of the
accused.
aa5 g. 7qrrI az.
1t was tentatively agreed this morning
that each side. should devote three-quarters
of an hour to argument In the case. AS
made the opening address. He was fol-
lowed by Attorneys D. w. Baker and
stuart Mcnamara, both for the defense, in
the order named. Assistant United States
Attorney keigwin was the last to speak.
United States Attorney Beach was not in
court today, being detained by reason of
the illness of one of his children.
What was regarded as a severe blow to
the defense was struck when Justice
Wright, after listening to arguments that
began at 2:30 o'clock yesterday afternoon
and were not concluded until noon today
overruled the motion made In behalf of
Watson that the jury be instructed to rem
der verdict of not guilty. This motion
was based on the contention of the defense
that the crime committed by the prisoner,
If any, was not embeZzlement, as charged
in the indictment, but larceny.
Only Witness for Defense.
The only witness called by the defendant
was former Auditor Petty. He was asked
merely one question. The defense then
rested. The remainder of the morning ses-
sion of the court, about twenty minutes,
was devoted to the consideration of prayers
for instructions counsel desire that the
court shall give to the jury. AS stated, the
summing-up addresses of counsel started
shortly after the resumption of the pro-
ceedings following the midday recess.
Mrs. watson, wife of the defendant, took
place by his side Immediately after he
entered the court room this morning. She
complained repeatedly, as she did yester-
day afternoon, that the room was too cold,
and about 11:30 o'clock she felt so uncom-
Portable that she left the room notwith-
standing one two windows had been
closed at her request. Watson also re-
marked regarding the chillneSS of the
atmosphere. The prisoner did not appear
to be very much depressed because Of the
ruling of the court against him on the mo-
ton to direct the rendering of a verdict of
not guilty. He laughed heartily when At
loiHeJ baker accused the prosecuting at
torneys of wanting the defense to write
for them the governments prayers for in
Structons.
Table Covered With Law Books.
The top of the trial table was completely
covered with law books at the opening Of
court this morning, and messengers were
Kept busy for two hours bringing addi-
tlonal volumes, to which reference was
made In connection with the arguments.
Attorneys Mcnamara and Baker appeared
TO be confident of the correctness of their
contention that Watson's crime. If he had
committed one, was larceny, and that he
could not be held under an Indictment for
emDezzlement. They argued that although
their client had actual possession of the
checks and drafts referred to In the indict-
ments, possession of the same remained In
Mr Petty, and therefore, the alleged TAX
ing was larceny and not embezzlement.
They declared that they could produce
authorities almost without end in support
of that position and rulings in numberless
cases on all tours with the Watson cause.
1t was pointed out by counsel for the de-
tense that Mr.. Petty had testified that Wat
son had acted as his messenger Counsel
added that the seven checks reierred to in
the indictments were placed in the manual
custody Of Watson solely for the purpose of
being carried to bank, and had never
been Invested from the possession Of Mr..
Petty. Manifestly, it was asserted, the case
was, therefore, one of larceny.
why, in this very court" Attorney Nc
Namara remarked, 1.-The court directed
verdict for the defendant in the case of B.
Shepherd White, who was indicted for en-
bezzlement because the alleged taking was
larceny"
Assistant United States Attorney Keig-
win took the view that Watson could not
have been irdicted for larceny. and that
the alleged crime must be embezzlement.
The prosecution laid stress on the asser-.
ton that Mr.. Petty was in no common-law
sense the master of Watson, as servant,
and that Watson was public officer.
Court Makes Ruling.
In disposing of the matter Justice Wright
briefly announced that the property alleged
in the indictments to have been taken
never could have been in the actual possess
sion of the municipality, but could be only
in the possession Of an officer OF the mu-
nicipality.
The statute under which the indictments
nad been drawn. according to the court.
was framed to deal with just such pecu-
liar situation as existed in the Watson
case. There never could be larceny by the