Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1919-01-09
No VERDICT YET
IN WILLIAMS CASE
Went to Jury At 4.4O Yesterday
AfternOOn-NO Report Late
Last Night

Montpelier, Jan. S-The Williams case
went to the jury at 4:4O this afternoon
after day of arguments and a clear and
well-defned charge made to the jury by
Judge Zed S. Stanton. The charge of
Judge Stanton defined the law and the
rules of evidence governing the case
The court instructed the jury to bring in
a verdict if they agreed before nine O'Clock
but at late hour this evening they had
not made their appearance.
| Franklin S. Pratt was on the stand this
morning for a short time and made fur
ther analysis of the now famous file 45Ol
which the State charges, was stuffed
| to balance the account of Auditor Horace
f. Graham Some of the items date back
many years. The State rested its rebuttal
| testimony at $3.50 a. m.
Earl r. Davis, States attorney, opened
the closing arguments in behalf of the
State. He called the attention of the jury
! to the various periods covering the indict-
| ments and undertook to show that after
the respondent became aware some time
| in the period of 19O2-Oi that there was
something wrong in the Graham account
he deliberately concexled that fact from
that time hereafter
j. Ward Carver opened the arguments
in behalf of the respondent. He urged
that if there were Irregularities in the
Graham account they existed by virtue
cf concealed and deceitful records and
therefore respondent Williams could not
be regarded as wilfuly guilty.
Frank Plumley closed the argument
for the defendant. He called the atten-
ton of the jury to the fact that the
practice, of making advances to State
offices was one of necessity and the
natural method of handling the State 8
business. He asked that ii that was an
evidence of guilt so far las it affected
Williams case and accused Auditor II. +.
Graham of wilfully spiriting certain
vouchers out of the office.
Was it his fault (referring to Will
liams) If he were misled and deceived
hereby? In the various talks testified
to here was there any question of dis
honest conditions?" Mr.. Plumley closed
with an eloquent address to the jury to
regard well it's sacred and solemn duty
and not to turn the respondent out in
his time of life to die in disgrace"
In the closing argument for the State,
the attorney general traced the history
of the alleged Irregularities from Jan
uary Z, 1909, into 1916. He referred to
Joslyns testimony and asked the jury
how well and safe the respondent had
followed the suggestions OF that honest
witness.
Why don't you get after Graham?' "
was what the witness Goslyn) had said
to Williams. WAS that not enough to
put him on his guard?"
Were the missing vouchers in the State
treasurer's office? Did the respondent
speak out in clear tone and save the
State from It's present disgrace? The
attorney-general took up reference vol
ume 1901 and said:
There were a number of vouchers con-
tanned in that file. all legal and proper,
but what about the balance Of that stuff
What of the thousands and thousands of
dollars that came creeping into the Gra-
ham account'some from vouchers to E. H.
Deavitt and other State officers, some dat
ing back to 1907-OS?"
The encouragement made political ref
crence in his arguments to which the re-
spondent took and was allowed excep-
tons. He said in effect:
Had Mr.. Williams heard that the audi
tor was about to become Governor of
Vermont? Did he wilfully and out of
choice mislead~the Legislature therein
Judge stanton defined clearly what
burden of proof" presumption of in
nocence' and reasonable doubt" as ap-
piied to the case meant and he charged
the jury to find the respondent guilty If
1t was satisfied that he had willingly ne
elected his duty.
He said: "If a proper and reasonable ex-
animation of the books and papers Of the
auditor discloses shortages, errors, de-
fects and discrepancies and he CWlliams)
| failed to report them, then he was guilty
of an offense against the law"