position is! As a matter of course and as had always been
the case, Mr. Cowperwood had a system. When the time came, this check
and these certificates would be automatically taken care of. He handed
his bookkeeper the check and forgot all about it. Would you imagine a
banker with a vast business of this kind doing anything else?"

Mr. Steger paused for breath and inquiry, and then, having satisfied
himself that his point had been sufficiently made, he continued:

"Of course the answer is that he knew he was going to fail. Well, Mr.
Cowperwood's reply is that he didn't know anything of the sort. He has
personally testified here that it was only at the last moment before it
actually happened that he either thought or knew of such an occurrence.
Why, then, this alleged refusal to let him have the check to which he
was legally entitled? I think I know. I think I can give a reason if you
will hear me out."

Steger shifted his position and came at the jury from another
intellectual angle:

"It was simply because Mr. George W. Stener at that time, owing to
a recent notable fire and a panic, imagined for some reason--perhaps
because Mr. Cowperwood cautioned him not to become frightened over
local developments generally--that Mr. Cowperwood was going to close his
doors; and having considerable money on deposit with him at a low rate
of interest, Mr. Stener decided that Mr. Cowperwood must not have any
more money--not even the money that was actually due him for services
rendered, and that had nothing whatsoever to do with the money loaned
him by Mr. Stener at two and one-half per cent. Now isn't that a
ridiculous situation? But it was because Mr. George W. Stener was filled
with his own fears, based on a fire and a panic which had absolutely
nothing to do with Mr. Cowperwood's solvency in the beginning that he
decided not to let Frank A. Cowperwood have the money that was actually
due him, because he, Stener, was criminally using the city's money to
further his own private interests (through Mr. Cowperwood as a broker),
and in danger of being exposed and possibly punished. Now where, I ask
you, does the good sense of that decision come in? Is it apparent to
you, gentlemen? Was Mr. Cowperwood still an agent for the city at the
time he bought the loan certificates as here testified? He certainly
was. If so, was he entitled to that money? Who is going to stand up here
and deny it? Where is the question then, as to his right or h