Rocky Ford enterprise., 1908-10-02

much assurance in this case, but the
inference was that Godding got this
sum also. The testimony. which tends
to throw blame on Godding for the
loss of the above mentioned sum is
this On various dates the &c. L.
mark made its appearance and each
time deposit slip was found in God
ding's name for sum identical to
that supposed to have been expended
And if this was enough on at least
one occasion Godding had an over
draft charged to him and this was
settled on the same day that one of
the &C. l." charges was made for a
sum identical with the overdraft. And
the overdrawn account was that same
day balanced by deposit in God
dingS name Leaving nothing over
or under but balancing perfectly thus
three transactions involving several
thousand dollars and each for exact
ly the same sum are recorded and the
close OF business that day saw God
ding'S account square.
Tuesday mornings session was taken
up with the cross-examination of F. J.
Spencer. the Denver expert.
While considering the column in the
assets and resources. Mr.. Cranston
brought up the matter of something like
S56.Oo0 Of overdrafts which were car
ried in red ink and wanted to know il this
item was included in the total as footed
up to show the banks resources. Spen-
Ger said the item in red was not included.
Then Attorney Cranston wanted to know
il he had not. while auditing the books,
deducted the item from the resources and
if while testifying yesterday. he had not
again taken this overdraft item from the
asset column. Spencer admitted that he
had. and Cranston wanted to know why.
The witness started to explain that the
item was really liability. but the attor-
ney called his attention to the fact that it
had been included in the liability column
in the last statement issued before the
failure. Spencer then asked for time to
look into the matter. and Mr.. Cranston
consented.
The defense finished the eross-sxami-
nation Of Mr.. Spencer just before noon.
After the recess Mr.. Pieathley was put
on the stand by the state in the face of
many objections on the part Of Goddine's
counsel. and Il was finally agreed that
the record should show that the state
Questioned its witness IN exactly the SANE
manner and that the same replies were
given ~ in the case Of Spenesr. and the
witness was excused. It was also agreed
that the record should show that the de-
fsnss saved the same exceptions in the
case Of Mr.. Piteathlsy as in Spsneer's
case.
Then came the testimony Of r. F. Lytls.
cashier Of The First National bank Of
Pueblo. who identified certain letters ex-
changed between the Stats bank and the
Pueblo bank concerning the overdrawn
account Of the former with the latter.
Mr.. Lytls's evidence was admitted only
after one Of the hardest legal battles
Of the case.
The letters were written in September.
October and November Of last year and
urged the Godding institution to pay up
the ovsrdrafts. or deposit additional Sc
eurity. and showed that DO arrangement
had been entered into between the banks
the ovsrdrafts should Be carried.
After on unusually hard day in the
court the state announced that they
would rest their case and the court ad-
jouIned.
On Wednesday morning A. M. Steven
son. attorney for the defense. made the
opening statement to the court. I. was
. revelation Of the evidence which the
defense says it will introduce.
Referring To Godding's indebtedness to
the institution of which he was. the head
Mr.. Stevenson said that the state with
all its array Of expert accountants had
been able to show but $40. 900. but when
the defendant went on the stand in his
own behalf he would state that the real
was considerably lees than this
sum. The matter Of the Dell bonds
pledged to the bank. Mr.. Stevenson ex-
planned by saying that when the bank ac-
eepted them as security they were easily
worth par but that later the government
granted charter to large power COM
pany authorizing 1t To divert a great por-
ton Of water from the Dell river and that
Godding's Wisconsin summer resort was
robbed Of its greatest attraction. And as
a natural result the bonds deprecated in
value.
Stevenson attacked District Attorney
White most severely on the charge that
in his opening statement he had made
assertions that were not afterwards jus,i-
fed by the evidence. He also claimed
that the state had succeeded in introduce
ing evidence. much Of which had no real
bearing on the case. And that this was