Omaha daily bee., 1908-03-14
PRISON FOR BANKER WALSH
Judge Anderson Sentences Him TO
Five Years for His Acts.
NEW TRIAL DENIED BY COURT
Charges Of Misconduct by Jurors
Fall Because Attorneys Were
Late I'm Making Their
Objections.


and sentenced to serve five years in the
federal penitentisry at Fort Leavenworth |
As soon as the court had announced the |
refusal to grant a new trial the attorneys
for the defense entered a motion in arrest
of Judgment. on which they argued for
some time. 1t was generally thought about
the court room that they would consume
two or more hours stating their reasons
for the granting OF this motion, but At |
torney Hart, who presented It, ceased
speaking in about thirty minutes. Judge
Anderson then promptly overruled the mo-
tioll and sentenced the banker to five years
In Fort Leavenworth.
Judge Anderson, IN denying the motion
for a new trial. spoke without notes. his
decision requiring about one hour in de-
livery.
Technicalities swept Away.
The Judge first took up the question of
the alleged nonassent to the verdict of
Juror Palmer, reciting the circumstances
from the records of the court and declar
ing:
1T cannot be said for moment that
Palmer dissented from the verdict To my
mind there is but one construction to be
placed on the whole matter and that is
that he assented to the verdict. II It had
appeared 10 COuDSeA IOI INC ueltHudnl lIldl
he did not do so they should either have
asked that the jury be sent back for fur
ther deliberation or that it be discharged.
No such request was made and the court is
therefore justified in saying that counsel
took. at that time, the same view as was
held by the court and that was that the
verdict was entirely regular"
The court further declared that the
charges of misconduct on the part of the
| jury were not founded on fact, saying that
counsel for the defense had stated in open
court that they had no objection to offer
to whatever degree Of liberty the court
might allow the jury at times when court
was not in session. This being the case,
he declared that counsel was barred from
claiming that too much liberty had been al
lowed, particularly when II had not been
shown that any improper use had been
made of the freedom granted.
Garter Not in Case at All.
'It is claimed by the defense that while
| in variety theater one of the jurors in
this trial removed the garter of an actress
What that has TO do with this case can
not imagine, and why dignified counsel
should bring It into this case is beyond
my comprehension. 1t has no logical or
possible relation to the deliberations of
the jury. NJ ~
| Much has been said about the inconsis-
tency of the verdict, It being claimed that
the defendant was found guilty upon sew
eral counts which charge the same offense
to have been committed in different ways
It seems to me that the verdict covers all
| the points in the case, and that there has
been no Inconsistency, as alleged"
] On the point of alleged error committed
I
Generally speaking, l want to say now
! that this defendant has had fair trial
Nowhere did the court allow evidence to
60 before this jury which was calculated
alone to prejudice the case Of the defend
ant.
I'm my opinion. no reasonable man could
hear the evidence in this case and have
any doubt that the defendant intended to
do the things that are charged against him
in the indictment. For more than thirty
years have taken part in legal procedure
as a lawyer and a judge, and it is my de-
liberate conviction that a more reckless,
utter disregard of law has never been
shown In any case within my experience.
Feeling thus, 1t was with considerable mis-
! giving, II / may so speak. that I sat here
yesterday for more than three hours and
heard counsel for the defendant argue that
the government had failed to show the
criminal intent
welsh Serves Two Masters
IT had occasion to say in ruling upon
a motion made by defenda ats counsel that
no man can serve two masters. To my
mind that is the key TO this whole situa-
tion. The defendant was "a banker and
president of a national bank. The proof
shows that he loaned to himself practically
seven-tenths or three-fourths OF the en-
tire assets OF this national bank-S17. .OOO, 900
or SIS. 200. .OOO-which was invested not in
properties which had been developed. but
in railroads and other properties which he
hoped TO develop. The banker was lost in
the promoter, the speculator, the railroad
nan. The evidence clearly established this.
He owed a duty to the bank his master.
He attempted to serve these other inter-
ests, the other masters. To my mind there
has been in recent times no clearer demon
stration of the statement that a man who
is a banker ought to be nothing but a
banker, and that until at least those bank
ers who own and manage national banks
understand that when they serve their
bank they cannot serve other interests
untft that idea prevails cases like this will
probably continue TO arise
under all the circumstances my duty
appears to me to be perfectly plain. and
this motion for new trial is overruled."
The defense then entered motion in
arrest OF Judgment, which was also over
ruled by the court.
Judgment at Once.
It was the general opinion that counsel
for the defense would consume considerable
time in arguing the motion for arrest Of
Judgment. but after Attorney Hart had
spoken for thirty minutes the court inter
rupted him. saying:
|. 81 think you may place those matters be-
fore the court Of appeals, Mr.. Hart; you
are making no showing here"
Turning to the prisoner, Judge Anderson
said;
"Mr. Walsh have you anything to say
why. l should not now pronounce judgment
upon youT'
Walsh, without rising. shook his head
slightly and the court said:
"The character OF the evidence and the
character OF the crime OF which this de-
fendant has been found guilty call for ex-
treme judgment The facts are, however
/ that this defendant is 10 years OF age and
that mere Imprisonment is of itself %