The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1843-01-17
General Sessions.
Before Recorder Talmadge Judge Lynch and Aldermen
Underwood and Martin

Underwood and Martin.
JAMES II. WHITING, District Attorney.
Jan. l6-7rial of Michael j. Saienger-Ths German
was put upon his trial for forgery in the third degree in
attempting to pass forged check for the of
to C. W. yorwerck and by him endorsed to saxten and
Palmer. The check was made pay able at the Union
Bank, and dated February I'd, 1912.
BENJAMIN F. ALLAIRE, q you z man, was called and
sworn-l know the prisoner at the bar met him
spring the Of Water Pearl Streets he hand
ed me check and asked me to draw the money it,
told him would, but suspecting that something was
wrong took it to my employer Samuel Campbell, who
ers, which did and they forgery the ac
cused todd me go with the check to Saxton and Pal
mer's, to whom it made payable but did take it
there; when ent back for him. the accused gone
he gave a check book the Union Bank with the
name of c. w. Vorwerck upon it, suppose he gave me
that to make it look all straight.
Cross Examined BY butcher for defence.-I am about
Is years OF age; was in lawyers office at the time; it
about the middle of the day when met the accused
this is the check he gave know it by the amount
also by mark that put the of il at the po-
lice office that afternoons the check in my pos
session hours before gave it to Ketchum and
Olcott when met the accused he had either a red or
yellow handkerchief around his neck; he had specta.
cles, but ! 10 not remember the color of them.
HENRY w. OLcorT, Of the firm of Ketchum & Olcott,
sworn-The signature of this note is imitation OF my
signature of our firm.
Cross examined by butcher for defenee-I do not
that the accused knew thing about the funds had
in bank, or in what bank we kept account.
Witness was about to proceed to explain how he knew
that accused might have had knowledge but the
sation having taken place in the absence of prisoner
ruled out.
C. w. VoRwERcK, called and sworn-IThe bank book
with his name upon 1t and the forged check was here
presented TO witness II do not thing about the
bank book-my name Is on ii, but never kept &C
count with the Fulton Baok-the writing in this chez k
is that OF the sccused-I know it, because have seen
him write often and have letters OF his in my possession
Cross examined by DSrcHER for defence-f was always
all aid OF the accusedhe IL great scoundre-he robbed
my brother of about $2oOohe could initiate my sisnstrre
this on the back OF the check is not like minethis 10
the way wrote my brothers, afraid Of sallenger
the accused and when wrote to him made small in
writing my name-when signed check made large
CT done this because ssesger the accused was 10 the
tage-he the letters from me, my brother often
snow ed them to himhe is great scoundrcl and cheated
store
The defence offered evidence, and under the charge
Of the Recorder the Jury, without leaving their seats
turned verdict guilty. The court called him up for
sentence but application of counsel it was deferred
until FRIDAY next
named Eliza Porter alias RUSSELL tried for an assault
and battery John RUSSELL black her colored keeper
by throwing vtroi on MN IN Caharne lane on the 10th
Joas RUSSELL called and sworn-The woman in
the box threw the vtrol on in Cathsrne lane had
been to the house whers she lived short time pre-
vious.
By DREssER, for defence Could you see her distinct
A.-Yes, could see her very stnct.
lQ.-What had she on her head y
A hat ayelow hat; know her as well as know
you, and praps better.
lQ-Is the woman your wife,
A-No, have lived with her since 1891, and have had
two children by her
Witness here produced the hat tha, he that night
the rim of which burned TO crisp as also bandker
chief with which he had wiped the yitriol from his face
The defence proved tba Porter the accused, had
plaid dress that night which she up the
ming about O'clock to make bed spread fromslso
hat the accused did not go OF the house that evening
Several other witnesses called who testified that
Rssels character very bad and that they would not
believe him under OATH The jury retufneda verdict OF
not guilty.
Forfeited Recognizaness-The names OF the following
persons having been called and not swsrng their