Weekly journal-miner., 1915-05-05

worked on the road but had paid .
 man who had.
 A demand on Clark from P. w. O.
 Sullivan, asking for $4 for money ad
 vanced to w. A. Long, for work or
 the road was entered as an exhibit by
 the defense. Anothe- exhibit in con.
 junction with this one was then en'
 tered, it being a check from Clark to
 O'Sullivan in payment of the demand
 Other similar incidents of this ma ture were introduced by the defense and all were admitted by the court; one more to O'Sullivan; one to R. T. Belcher, clerk of the board of super visors, and one to P. J. Farley, clerk of the Superior court. None of these men had worked on the county roads, but had paid men who had, and in re- turn Clark had issued them checks for road certificates which they in dorsed.
 Clark said that he boarded the men working on the Slate creek road at his mine to economize for the county. On this road work he had made ar engagements with Clarence Eckert, an employe in his mine to sharpen all tools for the road gang. In place of Eckert's time, Martin Fredericks, be- ing paid by the county, worked in the mine two hours each day that Eckert sha-pened tools. Fred Hawkins worked one day and Frank Cline smith worked 25 days to offset Eek ert's time. Clinesmith and Hawkins were both paid by the county and Eckert's time which was from five to six hours nearly every day easily off set this according to Clark. Eckert's brother Harry, also employed at the mine, worked on the county road at times and Clark said it was merely an exchange of labor.
 Clark also testified that a number of times he had asked the board to install new system of timekeeping for the men as he was no bookkeeper.
 In explanation of the difference be- tween the amounts on Jeff Cleg- horne's certificates and checks, Clark said that Cleghorne, at various times wanted money between pay days, and it was given to him by Clark and de- ducted from his check at next pay day,
 Clark was generally very elaborate in his answers, and at one time, o. Sullivan objected, saying that speeches were not necessary. In reply Attor- ney Clark said: There are others that are constantly making speeches"
 Clark said that he had run the boarding houses, but had lost on them. He also told how in June, 1912, he had informed the supervisors that he was losing money on the cook proposition and that they said, they did not want to see him lose money. From that he took it for granted that he was at liberty to pay cooks with the county's money.
 The next conversation that he had with any of the board in regard to cooks was with Harry Heap when he heard that he was going to be arrest cd for charging the county with his cooks time. Heap told him to see the county attorney about it, and he did, telling the county attorney that he would gladly pay back every cent rather than gain any notoriety from the matter.
 The last salary he received was for May, 1914, and at present the county 1 owes him seven months pay, as his | office did not expire until the first of January, 1915. He also said that the board of supervisors instructed him | to pay the road certificates for the | month of June and for this, he has never received any money from the board.
 Clark will be cross-examined by the 1 prosecution this morning when court I convenes at 9:30 o'clock.
 Among the other witnesses who were on the stand for the defense were Harry and Clarence Eckert, w. L. Fox, T. w. King, John Goodwin and M West.
 Fox testified that the road gang on Slate creek road had used hammers, wrenches, steel and everything else that they cared to use and which could be secured from Clark's mine. Further testimony along this line was objected to by O'Sullivan and he was sustained. Fox said that he did not know who kept the time of Mrs. Harry Ecke-t while she worked as cook for the men in the mine and the men working on the road.
 Clarence Eckert, the tool sharpen CT of Clark's mine, testified that he had worked there for a year from December, 1912, to December, 1913,
 I