The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-03-29

AZ twelve O'Clock to-day. Charles IL. Brewer. late re-
ceivng teller Of the Suffolk Bank, taken from Jail
by Sheriff Croker and brought before the Police Court
where complaint read to him signed by William w.
Tucker director Of said bank charging that the 9th
of March last he being at the time the employ of said
bank did embezSo to his own bank bills Of tho
denomination each of one thousand dollars.
That the Goth of March no did cmbczne four other
bank bills, each Of tho denomination of thousand
dollars.
That the Goth March he did frauduently embes-
e certain check the property Of the Suffolk Bank, Of
the value Of S1597 ca signed G v.&J w Loring Also
| certain other bank checks OF the value Of 50 273.
That on tho 10Th Of said March he did cmbezze certain
bank bills of the Value Of $1,000 and thereby did commit
tho crime of larceny.
Tho total amount Of embczzlemont charged is
$23.s61 60
After the complaint had been read b n Hallct Esq,
counsel for defendant in and after consultation
with his client stated that he ready to enter
| examination Of the
Mr. Sohcr for the bank. stated that he supposed that
this would be examined with the ether Thursday
next but the counsel for tho defence pressed for
examination at this time he should require half hour
Mr Hallctt stated that his client had already been in
carcerated in Jail under extraordinary heavy bail upon
nero suspicion Of larceny He did not think that either
corporation or individual should be allowed thus to
charge with crime without being prepared with
The Court remarked that only temporary delay Of
half hour desired to obtain witnesses, and he
should grant them that period.
s. D. Parker Esq who also appeared for the bank In
nated that the would probably be an intricate one
and desired to know il the Court would sit long enough
to-day to finish it, it being Saturday.
The Court replied that they should accommodate them
selves to tho the liberty OF subject at stake
The then allowed to subside order to allow
| the officers to get the witnesses
| The counsel for the defence Hon d +. Hallctt
Henry Iallet Esq, Of Boston, and William L. Brewer
The witnesses were called
Andrew X. Hunt-I am the assistant cashier in the
Suffolk Bank have been for twenty years know the
defendant he has been receiving teller of the Suffolk
Bank two three years he last ut bank Tues
I day all through business hours he not there
Wednesday la note was shown to witness should think
4 N wednesday, IN IN ia in hnt
am certain that it is his writing.
The note to the effect that he i'll and should
be absent but hoped to be down during the day 1t was
| directed to the cashier.
MIR soher here called the attention of the Court to tho
| dollar bills.
The witness was here asked if there any entry in
the handwriting of defendant in the books of the receipt
Of thousand dollars received by him the day Of
| the alleged embezzement
The witness here explained that the books for tho
receiving teller to record all moneys received by him
Mr.. Haett objected to the books being put into the
case or the witness tesyng as to the duties Of the de-
PENDANT, he being servant Of the bank himself There
was some considerable discussion to the admssibty
| Of the books
Mr. aet said that it was shown that the books wcre
not altogether in the handwriting of defendant another
clerk having been called in to help Mr. Brewer make
his entries, on account OF the press Of business
WitnessThere entry in the beck by any one, Of
the receipt $1,000 the 9th OF March if the receiv
ing teller receives cash, is his duty to record it.
/ Mr.. Hallett objected to this question
Witncs-This is the only book used for these entries
To Mr.. Hallett-I do not know that all the sums
The book then examined to the entry of - S75
upon it by defendant the Goth Of March, received
No entry was found
The third count for embezzing check for ST $50
| ~, and bank bills to the amount Of S6274
Mr.. Soher said that he should prove hereafter that
this check and money were deposited by ono at
| the same time.
An examination showed that entry Of this
upon the receiving teller's book.
The fourth count is for embezzling on the 10th of
March the sum Of $1,000.
On the 18th there was a memorandum on the book of
the certificate of deposit in the handwriting of defendant
OF check for $4,000 in favor of G. F. Davis, cashier Of
The receipt of this $1,000 should appear upon the de-
PENDANTS bloter but there such entry letter
that day or the 10th if there was any such entry it
would appear to G. r. Davis cashier by j. NJ. b. & Co
$4,000; but there is no such entry The witness
then showed the book Of deposit of s. A. Eliot trea
surcr of Harvard College.
Wtness-Therc is entry of the receipt Of $500 in
tho handwriting of Mr. Brewer the defendant The de-
post made the 9th of March, tho day Of the first
alleged embezzement
The witness then shown the handbook of Mr. A.
Lawrence treasurer Of the Salmon Falls Manufactur
ing Company.
S4S5 which appears to be in the handwriting of the
defendant there is no entry but figures
The witness was next shown the deposit book of VIM
Witness-0n the Goth of March there is entry Of
81 SCI in the handwriting Of defendant should
by witness Witness replied that he identified the figures
as those Of Mr.. Brewer.
The bank books Of Mr.. Gray and Mr.. Lawrence are
beaded in the handwriting of defendant.
Cross examncd-My duties as cashier of the bank are
answer the letters receive and deliver the foreign
money: located in the front part of the banking
room the receiving teller has desk at the counter
about fifteen feet from desk have supervision
the receiving teller; have casually him receive
ney; cannot swear to any bill he received at the
counter knew the book keeper directors to
ceiye the deposits Cannot say that it has has not
been done; don't know whether the entry Of checks
coived Is made the same day or subsequent ono;
know the entries have sometimes been made subse
queIt days; don't now remember but one case Of that
Sort that not the alluded to in the complaint
| II was received by the present receiving teller
/ Mr. ii. asked how he knew it.
| witness replied he could show IL by the books
On the 22d Of March find a credit to g, r. Davis Of
| $1,000.
Nr Hallett asked if this not Of tho credits
which he svore did not appear upon the biotter
Witness replied that he did not swear anything about
credits on the 22d of March The credit the 22d of
March corresponds with the dcpose check Of the 10TH
End nothing ese corresponding with it; If a deposit
check NJ Beebe Co. had been cut of since tho 10th it
must have appeared here up to the I'D or ed yet
nothing else upon which that entry OF 5000 is founded,
and think Of nothing else do not know whether
not the depose check torn of here, signed by Mr.
Brewer but should be inclined to sly 1t was Persons
employed to assist Mr. Brewer in regard to entries
made here receiving money from in the morning until
in the afternoon. The bockkoepcrs desk was next to
that Of the receiving teller.
BY the Court i know not of there having been any
pressure Of money receipts during that period
by Defence think know Thorndike Rand's hand
writing but do not know that he in the habit Of
making entries in the deposit book except during the
absence Of the receiving teller he might receive money
and not enter il in the deposit book have sometimes
received money there money received might be entered
the ledger and not the deposit book the ledger be-
ing the final book in which entries made; all the de-
posts may have been entered upon the ledger at any
the ledger does not agree with the minor books the
s7s63 % deposit on the 18th OF March is not my
knowledge the edgerthat Of 81 600 g. q. Elliott on
tho 9Th. IL on the ledger
Here long argument ensued as to The production Of
the ledger cf the bank in court.
The Court inquired Of the defendants counsel why he
did not notify the bank TO produce the ledger Mr. Hal-
t reIlied that his client had nothing d. with the
ledger his capacity Of teller Of the bank thet
other pcron who kept the ledger and he has ascondad
under suspicion that he is defaultcr. which dealca
sion it may be attempted 30 show is the act 81 the de-
PENDANT
After cond rhle argument on this point without any
result attained The INTERCEPTED Nc Hunt
particularly to tho entry the ledger of the $1,000
deposited by Mr. Eliot. witness could not fay whose
handwriting IL was in.
Mr. nsll,tt-if the ledger for 5000 credited to Mr.
Eliot has all his money and the bank has theirs and we
have not got 1t!
Mr. soher-Nr Eliot has 80 this but the bank has