Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1849-12-22
IMPORTANT TRIALS.


Just been terminated. One in Lycoming
and the other in Union county.
The first was the case Of the Common
wealth at the instance of the Lycoming
Mutual Insurance Company, VS.. Dr.. ]. ].
Updegraf, formerly Of this county, whose
house in Jackson township in this county,
together with his library and surgical in
struments were destroyed by fire, last
spring. The insurance was for $3,700.-
The Company paid the DR.. by their draft
on the West Branch Bank, 5000, and af
terwards instituted this prosecution on the
ground that the DR.. had made to them false
estimates and representations of the value
Of the property. The trial commenced on
Tuesday of the second week of the court,
and was not finished until Wednesday of the
third week. A large number of witnesses
were in attendance from this county,
The trial was attended with considerable
excitement in Lycoming county. The
sympathies of the people were generally
with the Doctor, and his acquittal, we un-
derstand, was received with tremendous
applause.
The other case was commenced on Tues.
day last at New Berlin, Union county, and
was an indictment instituted by the Com
monwealth at the instance of May &
Klose, merchants of Selinsgrove, against
Messrs. Giese & Son, late Commission Mer-
chants of Baltimore, for obtaining money
from them by false pretences. The indict-
ment was found at the September Sessions,
in Union county, and the defendants were
arrested in Baltimore, on requisition from
the Governor, and brought to Pennsylva-
mia, where they gave bail for their appear
ance, sc. An effort was made to continue
the trial until next sessions, on account of
the absence of some witnesses. The court
overruled the motion. Separate trials were
granted and a Jury was sworn in the case
of J. H. Giese the Son. The indictment
contained number of counts, the substance
of which was, that Giese s. Son had indu-
ced the prosecutors to give them two inland
bills Of exchange of 81, 900 each, and note
of $500 endorsed by Ner Middleswarth,
Esq, on which money was to be raised for
the purchase of grain by the prosecutors, TO
be consigned TO Giese s. Son. The prosecu-
tors alleged that the 1ote was not to be used,
and that Gese & Son contrary to agreement
had it discounted at the Bank, and convert
ed the money TO their own use shortly be-
fore they failed. This was the gist of the
fraud. The defendants objected to the adj.
mission of the bills of exchange and the
note, on the ground Of their variance from
the instrument of writing as laid and de-
scribed in the bill of indictment, the note
having been laid as draft. The court, al
ter various arguments, rejected the admis-
sion of the note in evidence, and the coun-
sci for the prosecution, on "Wednesday eve
ming, after short consultation, abandoned
the further prosecution of the cause, leav-
ing to the jury who should pay the cost
A nolle prosequi was then entered in the
other case. The trial excited great inter-
est. The counsel for the defendants were
Messrs. Preston and Hamilton of Baltimore.
MIR. Bellas of this place, MIR. Slenker of
Union and General Fleming of Lycoming.
For the Commonwealth, Mr.. Van Gezer
the Deputy Attorney General, and Messrs
Miller and Merrill of Union county, and
Messrs Jordan and Pollock of this county.
The two latter were only retained on the
day of trial.