Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1921-04-12

OF conspiracy.
Mr.. Garrett said there wns not |
scintilla of evidence by which William |
q. Cole should be put before n Jury.
At the conclusion of argument on |
the motion the Court retired to con-
slider Il.
Motion Denied.
The court was out only few min
utes and on returning Ia the bench
Chief Justice Pennewill announced that
the court declined to grant the motion.
The jury was brought in and attorney
Garrett made his opening statement
for the defense.
Mr.. Garrett said that William @. Cole.
whom he represented. while a deputy
in name. had very little to do with the
conduct of the office; that II would he
shown that he gave Tanning 800 10
show him the duties Of the office. which
Tanning never did; that William q. Cote
did not know the combination Of the
safe. and that he made no entries on
the Zee book--all he did was to check
| up when the delivery slips came in
We viii show 10 you" aaid MIR. Garrett.
that these men had good characters
and that nothing has been offered by
the state that viii show they had any
| knowledge Of anything wrong In the
| office"
| Judge Bali snid the defense will show
| that what the defendants did WAS done
! lawfully and In keeping with the GUS
| tom of the work IN the office
W. q. Cole on Stand.
william g. Cole took the stand as
the first witness for himself and the
| other two defendants. lie was ex
amined first hy Philip Garrett. lie said
| father Of Furman g. Cole: had been
made n deputy by his son in the office
Of recorder of deeds: his principal duty
was to make out deposit slips.
Whom he first went into the office he
said he wouldn't take charge Of the
cash. ms too many were handling II
didn't know the combination of the
safe occasionally did some work on
the foe book in checking off. some-
timva would find papers off the fec book
and would call Tanning nr Babcofk.
when Fannlnga attention was called
to one Of these Incidents. he would act
queer. on the day the defendant was
| arrested Fanning'H attention was called
by him Ia this. aud Tanning seemed
reluctant to make the entry required.
counsel for Defence
\ question as- 10 whether he had
given Tanning 800 To show him the
routine OF the Office was ruled out on
objection by the State
Defendant Coie in answer to a quea-
/ ton. stated he had no knowledge oi
anything wrong in the office up TO tbs
time he was arrested. did not know
then and does not know yet why hs
, was arrested. never got a penny from
the office outside of his salary, not ever
. | Il
. ting up of fence referred to. and onI,
= ordered the gate kept shut when com
plant was made as to people comm,
$ In and interfering with the work II
, said he often called Tanning when h
found papers were not on fee book.
. Cross-examined by Mr.. Souther
land he said he found very few paper
not on the fee book when he did h
called the attention of Babcock or Fan
! ming. Shown some entries on the fe
] book, and questioned whether or no
they were in his handwriting, the de
fendant would not be sure; made ou
a good many deposit slips. but not q
. of them. He denied making any '.E :
on the deposit slips, and would nc
positively identify any entry on the fe
book. Defendant was then excused.
Wilbur Adams, attorney. was calle
and told of having talks behind tn
screen; he never had any difficulty i
:. getting behind the screen.
IA Babcock Testifies.
. Walter Babcock. one Of the defenC
: ants. was the next witness. He tol
y of serving in the recorders Office undt
= several officials. He was there whe
:" Furman g. Cole took charge. and va
:, assigned to his duties by him. He. to-
Of the arrangement of the desks an
records in the office. lie told of ii
recorder making a request for the raj
ing, which was not put up for quite
while after the request was made: wi
ness detailed the routine work of Il
office, and said it was customary fl
rt any employe to receive papers for r,
cording and mai Re pencil notations; /
y knew the safe combination under a
of the recorders. and would open the sa
10 in the morning.
n Defendant Babcock denied that
NJ any time he abstracted from the box
Is papers any of them to prevent the
20 being entered on the fee book. Nor
ro his knowledge did any one else.
n Babcock testified that Fennimore d
III nothing more than enter in the fee Doc
az | the time paper was delivered ar
- | PAID IOr. 4 fuflnan Ii Cole received Il
- papers that came through the mail, al
- defendant said he had no right to al
!, did not open his mail. Il had nothir
to do with passing out the papers f
= indexing." lie did all the indexing for Il
u first two months after Furman G.. Co
went into office. None of his work
as said, in indeXing. had any connecti,
70 with any scheme or agreement wi
- anyone to embeZZle or abstract any
On the funds of the office. lie had no co
8 troll or charge of money that came in
IN the office, except when fees were pa
ut as papers came in, and had no access
OF it; had no agreement with any one
~ embeZzle funds from the office.
Irt Cross examined by Deputy Attorne
ill General Finger. Babcock said as far
Of he could recall he indexed charters on
res occasionally except during the first T.
p- months. He explained the method
air | paying. He couldn't state how ma
"" charters he indexed during month.
1t was not many. When charters car
10 him, he said. he supposed they h
= taken their proper and usual course.
- had no more oversight over the off
~ work than did Tanning. He (Babcoc
was at his desk probably not more tn
- half the time, would be in different pal
eiu of the office; did not know how mu
cash came in during day; would
ceiye cash and mark papers for recoI