The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-02-10
lot have notified tho cashier of

he may not have notified the cashier of
snail orerdrafts. nor could he swear
that he called the attention of the
cashier 10 the specific Items charged
In tho indictment; charges on the
books OF the bank may no made for
many causes. and many OF these causes
were enumcratcd--a score or more of
them without any money passing.
Notes and drafts were frequcntly
charged TO tho Davis accounts.
Witness read from the ledger the
deposits to the account If Davis &
Davis. from March : 70 October I.
l2o9 showing Il total OF S2iS.i5S.aS de-
posted during that tire. on October
!. tho account Of Davis q, Davis was
balanced, aud Charles II. Davis had
$50 To his credit AS fai Is he knew,
neither Of these accounts was after
wards overdTawu. Thcrn never was any
attempt made to consent The books
from the directors Of tho bank. They
were always open 10 them and the Of
iiccrs OF the bank. lie had frequently
requested the directors TO examlnc t!e
books. Witness explained the manner
Of settling with other banks ~ mum
her OF directors of the bank oyerdicw
their accounts.
Questioned by the commemorative
attorney, Witness said he d'd not know
OF the drafts drawn on various partiea
out Of the state anu trt''Isi u we
account Of Davis IS Da"is Several
deposit slips were Identified by witness,
and offered in evidence These repre-
SeH,cd deposits by drafts IN various
amounts. Witness could not state
whether the Petersburg banks iii set
Ting clcaranccs required the Appomat-
tox Bank during it's troubles to settle
its deficiencies In cash. Witness saiO
the directors seldom examined the
books. On March H. 1909, there was
n draft deposited to the credit of Davis
& Davis, and on March 10 there was
debit of S5,o0l.3a. but witness could
not explain any connection between
the two. and could not state whether
the Si.32 was the cost or protest
/ Draft Is Rcturncd.
! The next witness was y. l.. Aiken
| of New York city. chief clerk In the
/ Mechanic and Metal Bank successor
! to the National Copper Ennk, which
did business with tho banks In Pc
tersburg. The Mechanic and Metal
Bank received on July %, through the
| Appomattox Trust Company. n draft
! for $4,000 for collection. with waiver
of protest. Tee draft was not paid.
The Appomattox Company was so
notified The draft was drawn by
Charles Hall Davis on Arthur C. Hume.
! who refused to pay 1t, for the reason
/ ''thnt the party drawing Il had no
claim The court ruled out this lat
! ter clause. allowing only the state
mcnt to go TO the jury that the draft
was returned unpaid. The witness
was asked to state the condition OF
the Appomattox bank In It's relations
/ with the New York bank, which Gues-
I tion was objected to by the defense.
| Witness was on the stand when the
| court took recess.
t Personal Incident.
! II was Just before adjournment for
! recess that an Incident occurred be-
tween two OF the attorneys. which for
I a moment caused considerable excite
I ment In the court room. Common
] wealth's Attorney Mann, while speak
| Ing, made remark watch was re-
! scented by Colonel James Mann as
knowingly intended to prejudice che
jury against the defendant Common
wealth's Attorney r. II. Mann imme-
diately pronounced that statement as
untrue. and as known to be untrue
when made. Both of the attorneys
are high spirited men. neither OF whom
viii stand any Rspcrsion on their word
or character. They were not far from
! each othcr at the time OF the passage
of the words. They started for each
other. but were quickly seized by by
| ISLANDERS and prevented from coming
| together AS soon as order was re-
stored the court took occasion to warn
| the attorneys against such conduct,
and stated that 1t must MT be re-
| peatcd. Both lawyers Rpolog.zed to
the court, and. after mutual cxplana-
| tons, shook hands and closed the In
ctdcns
Afternoon Session.
a. NJ. Aiken, questioned by defense,
gave location and officers OF his bank,
the Mechanic and Metal Bank. j. G.
,nTN fnI s,,.t . 10
| bank. and didn't know OF the prosecu-
| tons against him. or OF his Indebted
ness to other banks, or that he was u
man OF large financial interests or
whether he vas a director in the
T, Canadian Trust Company. Was not
familiar with Robin or his acts or In
terests.
r. I. Wilson. clerk of the State Cor
porat.on Commission. was called to
Identify reports of the condition OF the
AppomattoH Bank. made to the COM
being 10 prove conspiracy and Intent
10 defraud on the part OF the dcfen-
dants. Davis and Bishop. The defense
promptly objected to tho Introduction
no proof OF conspiracy, or that any OF
the money mentioned IN the lndict-
ment had come into tho hands OF the
defendant The corpus delicti had not
/ been established
This matter was argued yesterday
afternoon and was reargued again
'"iS hi'einopN, IN we" or tho differ
eht aspect thrown on rhe case by to-
| days testimony. On behalf Of the
defense thu argument this afternoon
WAS made by George S. BERNARD There
was no evidence OF conspiracy. said
MI. BERNARD. no evidence that Mr..
Davis ever got dollar out OF the
oank impropsrly,. or that he was the
custodian of the funds or the bank, or
that the funds wero In his possession.
! All that has been proved In this case
Was that Mr.: Davis was n depostor,
ike others: drew out his money prom
erly, like other depositors, and that
h has paid back In fill everything
shown TO establish that Mr.. Davis, hv
virtue OF his office as president. ever
came into possession of one dollar of
the banks funds. He did overcheck.
as many others did but that was NOT
a criminal offcnsc
Mr. BERNARD argued to show that
Tho nllnpn