Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1842-12-29

Our usually quiet community was thrown into
considerable excitement on Tuesday last by the
arrest OF young man OF high standing. and as
was generality believed OF unim pcachablc intcgri,y
who was for few months during the year ISL
engaged as clerk in the 'postofIice charged upon
the oath OF the Postmaster with having robbed
Inc mail tn October, lSii. of package Of bank
notes to the amount Of $500. Upon his exani-
nation before the Committing Magistrates, (Mcs.
SIS. Waite, Sewers, Bruce, Reilly, aud Bakery
the following evidence was elected:
On the 27ih Of October, 1911, the Teller Of Tho
FARMERS and Piasiers' Bank of Baltimore, act
ing under the instructions Of the Cashier of that
Institution, made up package of notes, composed
chiefly II not entirely of notes of the Bank Of tho
valley anu branches, upcn each Of which he
placed private mark, which package, as was u
sua: IN such cases, he placed upon the Cashiers
desk, TO be forwarded through the past.of,ico To-
the Cashier Of the Farmers Bank at Winchester.
There was no witness examined who had ever
seen this package from the moment it was laid
upon the Cashiers desk in Baltimore up TO the
present time.
Within The iasttwo weeks there were received
at The counter OF the Bank Of the Valley two
Sl0O notes, one $50 note, and one $40 note. all
ct which had been received directly or niirectlv
from the accused These notes were mutila,.d I'M
such manner as to create the suspicion that they
were portion OF the money supposed 10 have
been stolen from the mail, upon mich susnicion
the accused was arrested upon the affidavit of the
Postmaster. The Teller Of the Baltimore bank
testified that the notes were mutiated at about tile
spot where his private marks were placed, but he
could not identify either of them, nor could he
say positively that the package contained notes of
similar denomination with those in Court
The Postmaster of this place testified that on
The night The package was missing, the mail was as
usual, opened under his personal supervisors, ihas
the bag containing the Baltimore mail came into
| The oihce In suspicious condition, (having three
iron locks upon it, though neither oil Them the pe-
| Of ~ ab tcl, - I:
fore and afterwards fastcned,) which attracted The
attention of himself and his clerks, and which
eNcited some surprise among tlien--,hat The ac-
cuscd was the first TO announce the failure of tbe
baltimore letter package-that thorough though
unsuccessful search was Immediately made for H.
the doors of the Office being locked all the while
and not having been opened since the arrival Of
/ The maitland That the accused, whose busiposs
II was TO assert the letters for distributions WAS nj
Work IN his SHIRT sleeves and could not have con-
ceaied so large package about his person OH
er witnesses were examined but we believe his
was all the information bearing upon The case
\ that could be elected, and which was d.ened
sufficient by majority of the magistrates TO
commit the accused for trial before the U. S.
District Court.
We do not wish to PREJUDICE the case, nor 10
say one word TO bias the minds of the public in
favor OF the accused; but cannot, in Justice ia
one whose situation has deeply excited the SYM
pat:les OF our whole community, close this arti-
lSiC NiiHout StdliiiS some circumstances which
seem to forbid the idea that he is guilty. of the
grave offence with which he stands charged.
| IL Will be borne in mind that there was no evil
dence TO pr that the package in question ever
reached the post Office in Baltimore But admit
! ting this iact-a letter was produced in Court from
the Cashier OF the Baltimore Bank, which repre.
sentsd the Postmaster at Baltimore as havinp said
that ii was ''proJaJLe" the package had been sent
from thence with the mail for ST. Louis besides.
there was no evidence to prove that roJbsry ,oas
committed at lie Winchester posi.ice ataA; on the
contrary. under all the circumstances as detailed
ny the Postmaster, it seems almost impossible
that there should have been-and the close inyes-
t'ealion of the matter for some months after the
loss of the package by agents Of the post-ciIice
Department and others, (if it has not been coniin-
ued up to this time without nte-mission,) could
elicit nothing in throwing any light upon the sub
Ilect. And to this the fact that the accused has
been in this town during the fourteen months
SINCE with bat two brio, intervals, and that moth.
ing has occurred to throw suspicion upon him
and we think his friends have the best grounds to
| hope tor his final and triumphant acquit,al
/ The case was ably conducted by Mr. r.. Y.
Conrad, in behalf OF the u. States and by Mes
srs. Marshall, Clark, ard Singleton for the ac
cuscd. u
The notice Of this trial which appeared in the
Virginian, of Wednesday, may make it neccssa-
ny to stale that the conduct Of Mr. John Wall.
the Postmaster, as the sole agent Of the United
States here,1was such TO meet the approval of
every one throughout the investigation.