Show igims brighter fertile bank E B JONES TESTIFIES he says the bank had no share of the collections made WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON the plaintiff in the big bank case rested after a little farther un import ant croba of mrs smith av mr W H kin made the opening statement for mr jones it will appear that the drafts handed for collection ware received at different times and mr jonea received them as a regular practicing attorney he was not dent of the banac at that time jones and S K king were than partners iu the law and plaintiff youth and R D jones did not want their jamea to appear in the transactions but they would like the drafta to go through the bank as belonging to the shaana lumber company the drafts were given defendant jona by R D jenoa and not the plaintiff when the drafts for callec tion they told defendant jones that each piece of paper might involve a fight from third parties aney wanted hia time if necessary as they would hae other business ot like im and for these collections they offered defendant jonas 60 par cent it will he shown that ho pave them moat of his time lor months part of this time was devoted to preventing R D jones and plaintiff from being and taken to oregon to answer an indictment for embezzlement cheso legal Bei vicea extended BO far as to nebraska where defendant went also to make collections defendant jones took no more than his tees judge henderson made tha statement for the defendant bank it will be shown that B brereton was president of the bank at the time the drafts in dispute were left there the bank officers knew nothing of the drafts elmer B jones had left the drafts in dispute for collection and they were credited to him when money cama in on the drafts it was turned over to E B jones it will be shown that the statement of the bank sworn to by ajr smith was a deliberate lie the statement spoken of was one given by the bank and not one sent to plaintiff A T Bb roeder was tha first witness for defendant jones prior to E B jones to salt lake he often called at the law witness aften while there plaintiff and wife visited defendant jones defendant would bring up money with him from which witness supposed was paid over to plaintiff often tha money was kept la the safe of witness and taken out when plaintiff culled witness bad never seen the money actually paid over E B jonca defendant took the stand he and S K king had been in business in their office was in the back room of the national bank of commercio Com merco he had met mr smith the plaintiff there augut 9 1892 he was with K D jones they came into his office B K king was there at the time they shut the door behind them after asking for a private talk R D jones did most of aba halkine tal kine he eaid they had soma collections on the provo city lumbar co and they wanted him to take them smith unseated that attachment be got out at once ihen witness explained what he anew about tha financial condition of the coDa pany saying tha manager had been at tho bank to ask for timo on bome borrowed money S K king to work at once getting out the papers and witness went up in the city and learned the company had already assigned later in the day smith and jonea again called at the law office and the assignment was mentioned to them defendant thought it would be dangerous to attach if he saw an opening by defect in the assignment papers bo would however attach they decided to leave the paper with him he never guaranteed the collection 0 the papers he turned the papers over to the bank for collection later at salt lake the subject of fees came in a conversation with K D jones and smith geuea explained to defendant that he had great deal of paper for collection that might be contested by third parties he said the lumber co was failing and the receiver might contest the paper he held but h promised pro misad defendant cent on all the paper that ha collected the wore to ba made in the name of tha bhakta lumbar co and defendant should giva i his time exclusive of all other business when ever required defendant agreed to these terms and it was understood that defendant was to keep out the 50 per cent due him for collections JR D jones also required that all payments to him be made in money not in chocks defendant had cone east in the latter part of august 1892 for R D jones and while away it was agreed that drafts for collection should be abent to the national bank ol 01 commerce ai provo witness claimed to have received nothing for this nebraska trio and he now acks for services he thought this was reasonable ho stated ater this trip in jelv 1893 defends ant spent a great deal of time figuring to nt plaintiff amith out of an ind ct ment him in an oregon court defendant claims to have received from E bjones for out of which 9 had bean collected the remaining part wa mainly un collectable it was claimed that had been in money to mr and mra smith A memorandum of the payments made was offered in evidence A t 6 p us the court until this THURSDAY FORENOON E B jonea who was on the witness stand last evening when the court ad jourard jou raed wa not present this morning when court opened owing to a delayed train the defense then put on the stand ri K acing hut the plaintiff refused to assent to thia until mr jones could be cros examined charlda redfield a former employee of the national bank of commerce ed that he knew nothing oi the business with the bank jude A testified to the number of times E B jones called on him aa assignee of the city lumber co wit nea when assign nee had ordered jones oat of the office of creditors martin was assistant cashier at tha time plaintiff and R D jonea called at the national bank of commerce he had heard the conversation at the time the drafts turned over he corroborated E B joness testimony is this regard ha never knew of bank paying money on cross examination witness baid he never knew of jones taking any money out of the bauk for plaintiff E B jones having arrived he took the witness stand and judge henderson attorney for the defendant bank examined him the court held that any new testimony could also be examined by plaintiff but that judge henderdon Hende raon might ilso cross examine the direct testimony witness came to provo in december 1890 he helped zd the national bank of commerce he never bad any practical operations in tha bank he never drew any drafts made any en tries in books or paid out any money he was no officer of the bank when he received collections from ha business waa solely that of au attorney witness had a regular open account with the bank and all collections on drafts of plaintiff were turned ov er to witness the bank turned over to him also all drafts not collected never had there been any understanding that witness and the bank held those drafts |