The Detroit times., 1909-06-09
ONE FREED ON
CURRIE'S STORY
Continued from Page ons.)

Continued from Page One.)
wage Of 100000, following the sale
by Hayden, Stone Il Co.. there was q
net debt Of about $500. 900, and he
admitted that had the $73l, 900 been
paid the arm would not have gone
bankrupt He admitted knowing that
the Bourlre account was shaky, but
says he didn't appreciate Bourke was
not responsible.
He got into difacuaties at the time
Of the San Francisco fire and we were
trying to get him out" he said. That
was our mistake"
After Mr.. Henderson had finished
with the witness. Attorney Frank
Simons. for Dolsen, elected the infor.
firm a dollar and the latters discharge
promptly followed.
Attorney A. b. Hall, representing
three OF the former clerks, then took
the witness in hand.
The dealings OF these young men
were not different from your own,
were they?" he asked
After some hesitation Currie replied
they were similar"
The line OF defense to be employed
on behalf or Louis II. Case and six
former employees OF the defunct brok'
erage firm OF Cameron Currie Il Co.
was clearly outlined In the course pur-
sued by the attorneys when the exam
ination of the seven defendants on a
conspiracy charge and Case on two
separate warrants charging embezzae-
ment. was taken up by Justice Jeffries,
Tuesday morning The conspiracy
charge being considered first.
At the very outset, Attorney A. B.
Hall moved 10 Quash the entire pro-
ceeding on the ground that. on the face
OF the complaint, no crime had been
committed, but Justice Jeffries over
ruled the motion temporarily and or
dered the examination TO proceed. He
will allow the attorneys TO submit
briefs on the matter later. Cameron
Currie then took the stand as the first
witness for the prosecution, though he
had also been subpenaed by the de-
tense.
The defense has also summoned
Henry B. Ledyard. chairman OF the
board of directors OF the Michigan
Central railroad. In an effort to show
that Cameron Currie traded in his
name, or, In other words, that he did
the same thing he charges his former
employees with having done. In which
case the prosecution would be de-
prived of one OF it's main props. Mr..
Currie. however, went into a full ex.
PLANTATION OF his dealings as far as
the Ledyard account was concerned.
This was TO the effect that the account
was a joint one and that all the trad
ing done under II was with Mr.. Led
yards full knowledge. Mr.. Ledyard
was not present In answer to the sub
pena. and Mr.. Currie said he under
stood that the railroad man had left
town.
The defense also attempted to sc.
cure an admission from Mr.. Currie
that he knew all along that his en-
ployes were trading under the names
of other persons and under fictitious
names, but was unsuccessful. Attor'
ney Henderson declared, however, that
be would show this later.
Mr.. Hall, in support Of his motion
TO quash, also contended that, under
the law governing partnerships, one
partner cannot legally defraud an
other, in which case, he argued. the
charges against Defendant Case are
not we'll founded.
Thus the defense will be. first, that
no crime was committed. but that. IL
there was, Cameron Currie was guilty
of the same practice and that. IL Cam.
eron Currie knew HE clerks were
trading in other names, there was no
conspiracy.
In reply TO preliminary questions by
Assistant Prosecutor Aldrich. Mr.. Cur
RE said he had been In the brokerage
business for the past Is or Is years.
and that Louis n Case entered his en-
ploy as a bookkeeper and later was
taken In as a partner. His recollec-
ton was that there had been an agree
ment Of partnership, but neither he
nor Mr.. Case had been able TO find the