The Washington times., 1905-06-30
L!PsCOMB ENDS TESTIMONY;
PUTS BLAME ON FIELDS
.ontinued from First Page.)

would not offer the letter at this point,
and began to question the witness about
a check for 81 $50 upon which his sigma
ture appeared He said that the sigma
ture looked genuine, but upon examina-
ton discovered that the check was dated
September %, 1903 and was cashed No
ven1ber 13, 1903 These circumstances
looked suspicious to the witness and he
declared it a forgery
At this point District Attorney Beach
pressed the witness as to his declara-
ton In the interview of June Z, 1904,
that he was prosecuting Fields for
ssem mbeZzIenent" and not forgery
This led to a dispute between the
two as TO exactly what was said, Lip
scomb fatty contradicting Beach. and
resenting the District Attorneys infer
ence that he was not as active in pro-
ducing evidence as he should have been.
He tartly informed MIR. Beach that 1T
was as much your business to prose-
cute crime as It was mine.
: Denies Getting Money.
Following this short tilt between the
defendant and Mr.. Beach, the District
Attorney asked Mr.. Lipsconlb if he did
not go to Fields on several occasions,
| the dates of which he fixed, and tell
him that he 0ipsconb) was badly in
need of funds, aid must draw on the
! account they had az the bank as re-
ceivers. The defendant emphatically
denied that he ever asked Fields for a
.scent of that trust fund.
''On june 90. 1903. didn't you go to
| Thomas NJ Fields, I-eur co-recefver,
and tell him that you needed $500 to at
tend the Georgia Bar Association. and
to let you have it from the trust fund.-
demapded Mr.. Beach
no. sir; l did not" the defendant
quietly but firmly declared.
Mr.. Beach then cffer43 in evidence the
guilt upon Lipscomb.
This produced a storm of legal objec-
tons from the attorneys for the de-
fense For the first time during the
trial the legal talent OF she prosecution
and defense locked horns in stubborn
contest over the admission of this let.
ter,
Major Holmes Conrad entered into ar
active participation of the proceedings
for the first time He made an impas
stoned and eloquent argument to the
court against the admission of such eyi
dence.
The defense admitted that the ..Deal
andrew letter was inadmiSsible, bu
contended that this fact was no ground
Z
testimony.
Justice Wright ruled that If the de
tense took the. position that LipscomI
had made a frank and complete state
rnent, this letter would be admitted
otherwise not. The defense declared
that thev would make no such inferenc,
to the jury from the Dear Andrew
letter and Lipscomb.s apparent franI
statement TO the District Attorney Th
letter, therefore, was withheld by tn
Government for the time being.
Ends DISCRIMINATION.
. This completed the cross-examination
) Lipscomb coming down from the sasn,
/ | at 1i:3o o'clock, having been a wines
for Teariy two days
,, The defense conducted a short lie
direct examination bringing out the fac
5 that Lipscomb signed several checks il
l blank. thereby giving a possible expla1
: alton of the s4,510 check which he re
, membered nothing about
Il The Government called few wit
: neSses In rebuttal
James P. Padgett was asked his rea
sons for withholding the Fields iette
! reason he assigned was that the thoueh
it reflected upon Mr.. Lipscomb. and tha
he also felt that it was confidentia
communication.
Alexander s.. Clark was 2 member O
the grand jury which returned tru
Dill against Thomas NJ Fields and tes
: tilted that on this occasion Mr.. Lips
come declared thai his signature to III
S4,oD checke was AZ forgery.