Bridgeton pioneer. (Bridgeton, N.J.) 1884-1919, 1905-10-26
URNER CASE
AGAIN ON TRIAL
Friday Morning,

are on the witness stand for CROSS
\ kamination.
Judge Jessup ordered the Court
pened as soon as he took his seat on
be bench, and former Judge Arm.
2}rong began the cross examination
here he had left off last week, by
Lying:
"Mr. Ware, you we're about to tell
ne the amounts you had received in
Repayment by assignments.
& Mr.. Ware replied in the affirmative
"When we're these payments made?''
Elm 1903. -
"You stated that Mr.. Turner gave
pu paper and that he said
j was false?'
81 said could not give the exact
knguage.
81 sDid he not say that the statement
lid not purport to include the total
esets of the Canning Go. ?''
"I have no recollection of his saying
D.n
GAS matter OF fact did he not tell
lou SOP
~ have no recollection Of it,"
Having to send for some books of
&he Cumberland Trust Go. Mr.. Ware
vas excused for time, and James s.
Ware, member of the Executive
Committee OF the Trust Co., was
talled to the stand to prove the state.
bent made by Mr.. Turner, and to tes-
3ify as to what Mr.. Turner said about
a in 1908.
"What, If anything, did Mr.. Turner
have to say about the statement?''
81 object to it," said Mr.. Arm.
btrong.
"The objection is overruled - said
$he Court.
II can give the gist of the converse.
bion. as recollect it, Most of the
Questions we're put to Mr.. Turner by
myself. read the statement TO him
hnd asked him if it was true and he
Faid it was not. y Mr.: Ware gave a
very full and concise statement of
what Mr.. Turner had said corroborat-
fng Mr.. John 8. Ware fully.
Mr.. Ware said he was present as
member of the Executive Committee,
and was not counsel for the Trust
Company.
Mayer Goldsmith, an expert &C.
pountant, was called to the stand, over
the objection Of Judge Armstrong, to
prove the falsity of Turner's estate.
ment," from the books of the j. F.
BRADY Go. Mr.. Goldsmith is public
accountant Of Philadelphia. He was
|asKed to show from the books Of the
Brady 90. the financial condition of
that company on March 1st, 1908. He
|said, cit was insolvent.
"To what extent?" asked the Prose-
cutor. '$1O. SOL. 3d." was the answer.
He said the Brady 90. was ipsoIvent
January 15, 1908. The assets of the
company at that time were $74, 1876. 81 !:
liabilities, $88, O44.95. exclusive of
capital stock which was $25, 900.
Friday Afternoon.
The State concluded it's case with
Mr.. Goldsmith as the last witness.
Apparently it had established the
fact of the making the written state.
ment by the defendant. and that it
was false statement, made knowing
ly, for the purpose of getting advances
from the Trust Go. The State had also
apparently established the fact. by the
last witness, that the books of the
Brady 90. proved that that company
was insolvent at the time the state
ment was made.
Judge Armstrong arose at the con-
clusion Of the States case and stated
to the Court that, as the State had
presented it's case, he did not feel that
it was incumbent upon the defendant
to put any witness on the stand, and
therefore proposed to rest his case.
This closed the case with practical
ly no defense on the part of John S.
Turner. the defendant.
Prosecutor Fithian began the sum-
ming up, in which he made clear,
lucid and masterful review of the con-
tentions of the State, as revealed by
the evidence which had been produced.
Judge Armstrong in his summing up
began with the assertion that the
State had started out to prove every
material point in the Indictment be-
yond reasonable doubt. His argu-
ment went on the line that none of
these had been done. He took up the
statement and endeavored to show
Its truthfulness and honesty. ga
technical prosecution for technical
violation of the letter of the law, !"
was what he characterized the case
brought against Mr.. Turner. He de-
ciared the Statement" was true, and
mad been proven to be true by the
States witnesses.
Every nrocnx,ptsor ha ooid 10 In