The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1908-03-18
STATE RESTS CASE
TRIAL OF COLONEL oUARLEs ii
PRACTICALLY CLOSED.
Advertiser Bureau.
Selma, March 1

Advertiser Bureau,
Selma. March IT,
The State rested its case this morn
ing in the disbarment proceedings
Col w. w. Quaries. after the defen-
dant's attorneys had finished their
cross-examinatfon> Of John d. Moseley,
upon whose evidence the state based
it's case.
Mr.. Moseley was put on the stand
by the state yesterday afternoon when
the trial was begun and when the
cross-exa mination had been finished
this morning 1t was after IL o'clock
The action of the State IN resting its
case after the defense had finished
cross examining Mr.. Moseley. caused
some surprise among the members OF
the Dallas Bar Association who throuE-
ed the court room and listened to the
proceedings 1t IL generally believed
that the state would put on the stand
several witnesses before concluding
the case.
While Solicitor Thompson announc-
ed that the case was rested II was
generally believed that the state Is
saving the strongest rcar dto be play
ed later and this will be done in the
rebuttal. The prosecution has num-
Der of witnesses summoned and all OF
these 1t is believed will be used in the
rebuttaL
When the court convened this morn
ing at o'clock there was large
number of spectators in the court room
and they stayed until the court adjourn
ed at noon for dinnar.
Juror Smith was in court promptly
at o'clock and when the other tur-
ors were escorted into the court room
nv a deputy sheriff he Joined them
and took his seat in the jury box.
Immediately after court convened
Mr.. Moseley went back to the witness
stand the defense kept up the cross
II o'clock. The GROSS examination was
severe and three of the attorneys for
the defense took a hand. solicitor
Thompson occasionally interposed an
objection but the examination proceed
ed rapidly except at tirEes when leng-
thy arguments were made over the
rnateriaIity of some question.
The cross examination of Mr.. Nose
ley was made principally upon two
afiidavits which he had sworn to and
which with other evidence was the
cause of the Central Council of the
State Bar Association returning the
two counts counts against Colonel
ouarles. During the severe cross ex-
animation Mr.. Moseley stuck mainly to
his evidence on direct examination
yesterday afternoon.
After the State had finished it's
casM the defense put Colonel Quarles
on the stand. Colonel Quarles contra
dicted practically every particle OF the
testimony which the State had intro.
duced through Mr.. Moseley
The defense had Just concluded with
the witness at IL o'clock when Judge
Miller announced that an, adjournment
until o'clock would be taken.
Colonel Quaries tsetined In sub
stance that Mr.. Moseley had approach
ed him IN 1904 and offered him the case
for the recovery OF the land. saying
that he knew all about IT and that
Mr.. Moseley had called upon him sew
eral times and that during these Wis
Its he had made out q contract for
Mr.. Moseley who could not write good,
his right hand having been accident
ally shot on some few years ago: that
at the request of Mr.. Moseley he had
also written a few instructions and
had later. after repeated requests, en-
dorsed note for Nd. Moseley. Sew
eral weeks later Mr.. Moseley had call
ed at his ONCE and threw down upon
his desk the contract which had been
signed by the widow and heirs Of
John d. Molette, who at that time re-
sided in Indian Territory. and that as
he threw down the contract he had ex-