The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-11-24
Siegel Guilty; Sentenced
10 Months and $1,000 Fine
Continued from First Page.

indicated that the defendant believed he
would be able to pay back the money he
was accused Of obtaining under false pre-
fences.
He permitted all the facts to be pre-.
scented to the jury. Justice Clark said, In
order that IL might decide on the com
spiracy alleged by Mr.. Train in his OPEN
ing and through his examination OF the
states witnesses. The competency Of
that evidence, he said, was for the Jurors
to determine.
Tho four points necessary TO establish
larceny. according to the charge, were the
making Of false statements knowingly the
banks reliance on the statements, the banks
parting with It's property and felonious
intent on the part OF the defendant to de-
prive the bank OF It's property In mis-
demcanor he argued. there liz no present
criminal intent to steal the property OF
another.
Although the defendant Is charged In
tho indictment with the crime of grand
larceny In the first degree Justice Clark
coutcnded, III that charge IL not estah-
| ished beyond a reasonable doubt. under
the law y0i can find him guilty of a
misdemeanor II the facts warrant IT, \
reasonable doubt II not a guess caprice
or within. a possible or speculative doubt,
hut such "A doubt "a would arise under
I the evidence In an Intelligent and honest
man"
Justice Clark explained that Siegel was
on trial charged with the larceny from
! the National Bank of Commerce OF
| s6S405 for the Fourteenth Street store
on false representations TO the bank with
criminal intent to steal. lie read tho
law defining the crime and then the sec
ton added two years ago making 1t q
misdemeanor to obtain property or credit
or n loan by the use or false statements.
lie repeatedly referred to the intention OF
| the defendant to steal az necessary to
effect the crime OF grand larceny, citing
"a homely simile OF IA farmer obtaining a
loan of $1,000 on prospective potato
market, which fell after the loan was
obtained on false statement to a bank.
The Judge warned the jury not to be
/ swayed by prejudice or sympathy for
Siegel or his bank depos!tors or the be-
( lief OF counsel on either side. but TO Judge
solely on the evidence. He asserted that
/ Siegels silence was not TO be held against
| him and was to argue no differences or
! presumptions OF his guilt.
! Judge Clark also made strong point OF
| the character witnesses for Siegel saying
/ that evidence OF good character may be
/ sufficient to create a reasonable doubt
in the minds of the Jury as to whether
/ or not a person OF such a character would
! commit the crime alleged. .he jurors.
/ NJ said, are responsible TO their con-
. sciences ana tntlt nAlOS ana not 70 llubllc
camor. to avoid which the case was
brought UP here for trial
As soon as the charge WAS over, al
about 80 o'clock. the jury went "a
supper with sheriff simpson and then
began It's deliberations. The twelve men
In the box hal listened to addresses prac-
! t!cally all day long except for about
ten minutes this morning, beginning with
Mr.. Stanchfields formal mo;ions TO dis
miss the Indictment. The Judge then
In his ruling declared that he had serious
doubts as to the commission OF grand
larceny and u.s. to whether the money
;hat paid the alleged larcenous check
was part OF the moneys the Fourteenth
Street Store received.
1t was not q surprise that Mr.
Stanchiield should OFFER no witnesses for
tho defence. His summing up for the
Jury, for which the. court allowed each
side two hours. beginning a few minutes
before 3 O'Clock. proved his belief that
| no defence was necessary despite the
mass Of evidence piled up by the state,
Calls Prosecution Unfair.
Mr.. Stanchfeld argued that the stat,
had been unfair with "eStravagant and
/ IMPROPER statements" OF the condition
OF the stores and in references 10 the bank
He said there was no question about Sic
gels intent TO pay back the notes al
! maturity and that the check itself was
paid out OF deposits OF the store be-
tween May II and June IA
Counsel for the defence argued that
the bank relied not on the alleged falls,
credit statements. but on ten years OF
dealing with Sisgcl and Nogcl, and tht'
the CORE, poudence with Chicago for In
formation as 80 their solvoncy was due
To the additional, credit line that they
wanted. the stringency OF the money mar
ket. currency legislation and the con
ID 10 n.
time He denied the conspiracy charg,
and showed why Il was improbable Sai'
Mr.. Stanchfield:
"My personal ambition in this case f.
that SeRel go back to rh'cago and tax
the position that j. waiting for him a