Evening star., 1907-07-01
DISCUSSION OF PRAYERS
Arguments Will Be Limited to Three
Hours Side.
CALLED IN FINAL REBUTTAL
Witness From New York Testifies To-
day-Ruling Announced by
the Presiding Justice.

| court NO. 1. the scene Of the trial of Ed
| win 8. Holmes. jr.-the cotton Leak case
Excepting few minutes at the opening.
| was devoted to final discussion by the at
torneys of the prayers for instruction to
| the Jury. 1t was agreed Just before the
| noon recess that the arguments by each
side shall be limited to three hours, and
! the court will sit until o'clock this after
noon. That pan will permit United States
| Attorney Baker to open for the govern
ment. and Attorney Lester to make the
| first presentation of the case of the defense
this afternoon. Attorney Worthington will
| close Holmes side tomorrow morning, and
| Attorney Beach will make the final argu-
ment for the government just before the
| noon recess tomorrow so that Justice Staf-
| ford's charge to the jury may be delivered
| tomorrow afternoon.
In final rebuttal the government this
| morning called to the witness stand Emil
Kapperell of New York. custodian of the
I safety deposit boxes of the Broadway Safe
| Deposit Company. He testified that
Holmes rented a box In that Institution
rector of the census bureau, was called to
give evidence about alleged visit OF
Holmes to the bureau to secure information
| 1904. as was testified by Louis {. Van
Riper. but objection by the defense to the
| questions asked Mr.. North was sustained.
Refusal Of Prayers.
The court refused fourteen out Of nine
teen prayers offered by Attorneys Worthing-
ton and Lester. and considerable argu-
| ment ensued as to the sixth and seventh
prayers. which specified that no presump-
ton should be drawn against the defend
ant because he had failed to call to the
witness stand Moses Haas and Frederick
Peckham Of New York. who were indicted
Price. the New York broker, whose name
was frequently mentioned in the testimony
Of Van Ripper.
Justice Stafford. in disposing of the matter,
| said Peckham and Haas were witnesses
who must know whether the story told
by Holmes was true. and that they were
SO peculiarly witnesses for the defense that
the government could not have been ex-
pected to summon them. AS to the legal
prohibition against them giving testimony
the court declared they could not claim
that privilege unless they should state that
answers which they might be called upon
to give would tend to incriminate them,
and II Holmes story is true they could
not claim that privilege.
Justice Stafford also said the same
statement Of fact he felt to be even more
| strongly true to Theodore II. Price Both
prayers of the defense dealing with that
phase of the case were accordingly re-
fused, and Justice Stafford subsequently
refused a supplemental prayer by which
Holmes attorneys asked that the jury be
lOlQ 11ddS ana fockndm would nave D6en
| subject to arrest If they had been brought
to Washington as witnesses.
Presumption of Innocence.
The prayers granted to the defense
| were those dealing with the presumption
| Of innocence always granted the defend
| ant; the fact that the jury must be salts
| fed beyond a reasonable doubt bef ore re-
| turning a verdict of guilty; the credence
to be given to evidence of the previous
| good character of the defendant; that
| evidence introduced in the case, while
| tending to prove that Holmes and his CO.
defendants derived large proceeds from
| speculations in cotton. is to be considered
| by the jury only in SO far as 1t may tend
| to prove that Holmes is guilty as charged
| In the Indictment, and that the defendant
| Is not charged with having conspired
| to have definite prearranged figure in
cotton crop reports.
Opens for the Government.
In opening for the government at the be-
| ginning of the afternoon session of court
| United States Attorney Baker emphasized
| the fact to the jurors that they must be
| the judges whether the allegation made in
the indictment against Holmes had been
| proved. He reviewed the service of Holmes
| in the bureau of statistics, and declared
| the evidence, even out of Holmes own
| mouth, showed that the law, the regulations
! of the department and the custom of the
office required the reports upon cotton and
other crops to be kept secret until the
| day of publication of the reports.
Using two written reports of Special
| Agent White for Illustration, Mr. Baker
| stated that these special agents figures
| were received in the department where
| Holmes had access to them two to three
| days before the cotton reports were is
| sued. and that the department stamps as
| to the dates proved the defendants state
ments that the preliminary reports were
not received In the department until re-
port day were absolutely false"
THE crop reports were always issued
on the Sd and 10th of each month" Mr..
| Baker said. land it is a peculiar coinci-
dence which shows Haas and Peckham
| to have been visiting Washington on those
dates in many months.
Alleged Borrowing of Money.
I'VE have shown you that Holmes was in
the hands Of the 10 per centers between
June, 1902. and June, 1904: that he was
paying per cent interest per month on
loans during that time. And in September,
1904, we see him not only in possession of,
hut loaning to another man. such a great
sum as SIS, 900"
At this point Mr. Baker exhibited the
loan agreement, signed with Holmes name,
in which the receipt of Thunder Mountain
Mining Company shares from Van Ripper is
security for the loan Peckham, called at
tention to the fact that Holmes repudiated
the signature, while on the other hand Mr..
Van Ripper testified to the lean, and DR.. c.
C. Clark and Post Office Inspector Mayer
identified the signature as Holmes hand
writing.
Further than this the testimony shows
that the government knew nothing about
this loan until the defense questioned Van
Ripper about it," Mr.. Baker continued.
How did the defense know about It?
Because the defendant knew 1t true.
He didn't get that $4,000 from the sale
OF any mine."
Referring to the amounts of money ac-
counted for by Holmes being in his pos
session in the early part of 1905 the United
States attorney declared the defendant
own bank books showed total transactions
involving $50 $50, $3.50 more than
Holmes claimed to have received from the
sale of his mine.