The Washburn leader. [volume] (Washburn, McLean County, N.D.) 1890-1986, 1911-08-25
Bickford Trial Set
For Coming Week
Nav Be Heard Later As There Has
Been a Delay In Transeribfng
Of the Evidence

grounds for the motion for q new
trail to make almost certain the
setting aside of proceedings al
ready had, is the belief entertained
by counsel for G.. L. Bickford, the
former treasurer of North Dakota
convicted recently Of
embezzelment. August 81 is the
date that was fixed by Judge
Crawford for the hearing of the
new trial motion, but the present
indications are that it will be some
time later before the case is heard,
inasmuch as there has been an un-
avoidable delay in the transrcibiug
of the evidence.
One of the first grounds upon
which the verdict of the district
court of this county will be
attacked will be that relative to
the soundness of the information
itself. District court judges have
ruled on that feature, the efforts
of the defense to have the infor-
nation set aside both times being
fraught only by failure.
In the information, the legality
of which is questioned, is the
charge of embezzlement. To
make mp that charge there are sew
eral items, namely, the so-called
Barnes county deal, the insurance
money and certain deposits or
checks. The total amount with
which Biokford was originally ao-
oused of embezzling was $50, ,49O.
OF that amount $4,000 is ident-
ifed as being insurance money.
SIS ,48O is the Barnes county item,
and 10000 is the deposit in the
Bowbells bank, or checks drawn
on other depositories and trans
ferred to the Bowbells bank which
at the time belonged to Mr.. Bick-
ford.
In the trial of the case, each of
these items were shown to be
clearly defined aud separate from
one enother. The claim the de.
fense makes is that under the
North Dakota law, it is not legal
to try a man on three separate
criminal offenses at the same time,
alleging that as a matter of fact.
the information does not allege
three different offenses, while there
is only one general charge.
Another point on which the de-
tense will make a strong fight
when the case comes up again is
that on which the verdict of guilty
was returned. In the progress of
the trial there was an item ad-
mitted as evidence tending to in
dicate motive on Bickfords part
relative to alleged crookedness in,
the administration of the affairs of
the Office. This particular item
was one for a little more than 454,
and it is the one on which the
jury returned verdict finding
Biokford guilty.
In the evidence that was drawn
out, the small amount in question
was shown to have been paid into
the treasurer's Office by the Flax
ton bank as interest on a deposit
of about 5000 in that institution.
The defense, when Mrs. Mitchell
was on the stand, brought out the
fact that there was approximately
$160 in cash in the state Office, the
source Of which was not known,
and it was the theory of the de-
tense that the s54 in question was q
part Of the amount having been put
into cash and not credited TO the
interest account, as it should have
been.
With these points constituting
the principal basis Of attack, the
defendant u confident that the su-
preme court will reverse The lower
ooust and oedsf abandoned u pro-
Coatinusd q q 8 ~.