New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-05-13

as prosecuting officer, he has been open,
generous or fair"
The exclamation OF the events leading
I'D 70 the disputed loan of S5ooeoo on
October Ii, 1907. upon which the whole
case hinged. was made by Mr. Stanch-
field 10 seem to have been wholly dis
interested transaction. without any in
tent TO defraud or injure or embarFass
the bank.
Judge Hough recited the. statutes sald
TO have been violated by Heinze III
opening his charge. He consumed just
one hour in his talk TO the jury, ana IN
addition to his constructions OF the la"
and the evidence gave a lucid history
Of the case His general leaning was
evident on several occasions. He said:
Won NAV take il as an instruction by me
court on a matter of the Law that although
from a consideration only OF the oSc~I
rences al the bank on OCTOBER IA - a.
-ele+ed bv the witnesses, together with the
condition Of the banks books on that Gay,
Won NAV ~. OF the opinion that there was
rcgIipe-1r unskilful and even dangerous
banking: and although you may De OF u
Yriuion that illegal certifcatlons were mace
that evidence alone is not Sufnclefs1 10 Wa
rant conviction upon Any Or % ~ 49, e
of the indictment. and therefore those &c
currences and that evldeIce ma me-, o 80,
n conjunction with the other evidence
but standing by themselves. indifferent OF
al most not proof Of guilt.
If The defendant did on behalf Of the Rank
agree 10 loan his brothers firm either S+t9,-
COO or S50o.eo0. or any other sum so large az
20 make the total liabilities 10 the bank OF
Otto Heinze & Co. and Arthur p Heinze
taken together. more than 10 per cent OF
the hanks capital and surplus; he dld an
act Illegal under the laws to which / have
called your attention
He did not infringe upon p criminal stat
ute: ne did not commit a crime by making
-hat agreement II such agreement was
made but he did agree 10 violate the iaW-
He nay have made valid ana olFla nom
contract with Otto Heinze * Co: he may
have subjected the bank 10 civil suit AT the
hands Of that firm IL the money was not
forthcoming. but all that Is not 10 OBSCURE
or conceal the inquiry, 'ld ne dSIeLda M
feirze commit the crimes Of which ne
stands charged on the afternoon OF octo.
her "a 1902" For. if he did. the fact that
he made a contract is no justification Tor
the crime, even though il would have been
Impossible 10 perform the contract without
committing crime.
Judge Hough closed with directions TO
the Jury TO take the fifteen counts re
ferring to misappiication as unit and
the remaining fifteen counts, referring to
decentralization. the same way. The ac-
cused man should be found guilty or in
nocent OF the whole fifteen, he said
Then he advised any Individual juror
who might be in the minority in their
deliberations TO reason carefully before
deciding TO hold out against the major
itv sentiment. There was a feeling that
there would he a disa greement, and that
tie court. when he made his last re-
mark. felt very much the same way.
Butte Joyous Over Acquittal.
NJ. Heinze's counsel announced at the
Waldorf late at night that Mr.. Heinze
had received many kilograms Of con-
graduation quickly following his &C
auittal. One from The Butte lMont)
Evening News" read as follows:
Every man, woman and child in Butte
is celebrating tonight The streets are
thronged with your townspeople. band
is leading Joyous procession. You can
have anything in Butte you want We
have never seen such enthusiasm. not
even on your last arrival. It seems 10 be
signal for three years food of pent-
up sentiment and friendship. The whole
town sends its congratulations"
Another telegram was from Judge
Henry c. Smith, of the Supreme Court
Of Montana.
The government began its proceedings
against F Augustus Heinze soon after
the big stock slump in the autumn Of
1907, and by January. 1908. Henry L.
Stimson, who was then United States
Attorney, finished his Investigations, and
the federal grand jury brought the in
dictment of thirty counts on which
Heinze was tried This indictment was
permitted TO rest while Mr.. Stimson
pushed the case against Charles W.
Morse. who was convicted in the follow
ing autumn and sentenced 10 fifteen
wears in the federal prison at Atlanta
Mr. Wise's Fight for Books.
When M Wise became United States
Attorney he took up the Heinze indict-
nnent That was a little over year
ago. He tried TO get the books of the
United Copper Company. and succeeded
ir getting them after a hard fight which
resulted in the conviction OF Sanford
Robinson. a Heinze lawyer. for oh
structing justice. and Arthur P Heinze
on a similar charge. There are indict-
nents against T Augustus Heinze and
Others due TO the same battle for the
books indictments that. IL was said last
evening would probably he quashed