The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1909-06-26
.DALzE[L BROWN NOT
PROMISED IMMUNITY
POintedly Tells TreadweIl's Att
tOrney He Is a Convict and
Has No Contract
Assistant DistrictAttorn Cook
Causes Storm Over the
Dummy Account

II am not testifyinE under any con-
tract for immunity, Mr.. Byington. I
am still serving a sentence in the state
prison. Furthermore, i never discussed
immunity with any one connected with
fhe district attorneys Office."-J. Dali
cell Brown.
In a quiet tone ]. Dalzell Brown.
formerly manager OF the defunct Cali
fornia safe deposit and trust company.
and now serving q sentence at San
Quentin for embezzlement, effectuaiiy
disposed OF an insinuation yesterday
by Lewis Byington that he was giving
testimony in accordance with the de-
sires OF the district attorney in the
trial OF James Treadwen, the director
OF the looted financial institution who
is now on trial for the alleged embez-
element Of more than 100000 worth OF
the banks securities.
Brown was the principal witness Of
the day, having been called back for
cross examination. Byington, of coun-
sci for the defense, endesvored to bring
out a discrepancy between the testi-
nony of Brown in the present trial and
the evidence he rendered in the case
against Walter ]. BARNETT another
official OF the institution, who was con-
victed Of embezzlement.
NO IMMUNITY CONTRACT
You are testifying under a contract
OF immunity, are you notT' Byington
suddenly asked, having made no prog
ress in his attempts to prove conflict
ing testimony.
Il am not testifying under any con-
tract for immunity. Mr.. BYington. I am
still serving q sentence IN the state
prison Furthermore 1 never discussed
immunity with any one connected with
the district attorneys Office" answered
the witness.
A great portion of the day was taken
UP by opposing counsel in legal argu-
ments- Assistant District Attorney Will
liam .Hoh Cook prectpitated the first
skirmish during the morning session,
when he attempted to introduce in evil
dence a check for $4,000 drawn in
favor of TreadweIl on an alleged dunn
my account entitled Trustee No. g."
The defense objected. and Cook stated
that he intended to show that not only
was the Trustee Account No. 81 a
mere dummy utilized by Brown, Bart
nett, the two TreadweIls and Bradford
for the purpose of covering up other
illegal transactions, but that Septem-
Der 19. 1905. the check for $4,000 was
drawn for the purpose of giving Tread
well a fictitious credit. The prosecutor
got before the jury the fact that he
intended TO prove the defendant had
drawn check for S5s.269 in payment
for the stock of the Farmers and Mer-
chants bank of Colusa and of the Sac
ramento Valley hank, when his account
only contained the sum of $4,000.
CHECK NOT ADMISSIBLE
Judge Conley held that the check was
not admissible In evidence
II. \. Stoors, a clerk employed by
E J. lie Breton. receiver of the bank
was recalled TO identify books and &C
counts, and George B. Klink. an expert
accountant. occupied the stand for a
short time, being called for the same
purpose.
Cook evoked q storm of protest in
the afternoon. when he endeavored to
get before the Jury evidence tending
10 show that Treadweu had committed
other crimes in connection with his
management of the bank. The attor-
neys for the defense contended that the
instances referred to were too remote
10 have any bearing on the point at
issue.
The court took the matter under ad-
visement until Monday morning.