The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-02-14
Court OF General Sessions.
Before Recorder Tillou, and Aldermen Tweed


Fen. 12-Charge Of False Prefe,ce.-Isrdict under the
Staute-William Ipes, who held to bail last month,
for obtaining thousand dollars from Messrs Merritt
Trask Is alleged by false pretences placed trial
and the Jurors not empsnnelled, discharged till this
morning The Assistant District Attorney stated the
which given at the time of his arrest and
briefly, that some fifteen months ago, ia October $780,
he had called st the office Of the prosecutors and pre-
for Slo00 saying he wanted the money to pay the
North river side and they believing his approximations
that he had the money in the bank let him have It, 1t
taking check trust; it accompanied by repre-
sentsop that he had the money in the bank The next
day the check came back marked, not sufficient
no account" He knew these sort of transactions
often over oked ana excused but important that
this cor ndence should be observed in matters OF
business and they TO look at surrounding cir
cumstances They would show he had made
but small deposit in that bank and the law would
permit them, in order to show the intent, to prove
similar acts, as that on the same day he passed
another check, for similar amount else where
and third for q smaller SUN. He then called MT Benz
jamn j. Ii. Trssk who depssed-He partner In the
firm Of Merritt Trask ship ohapders 50 South street.
they carried on that in October 1850 he then
knew the defendant who dealt in Hour in that month
he (the defendapt) parsed a check to them on the
Seventh Ward Bank dated Oct H. for thousand dol
lsre had had some dealings before, and had taken
check from him; the check produced Is the one for
perhaps he ut dinner; witness did not know where
he VAS IL between two O'Clock and half past the
whole Transaction was with witness
Examination resumed:Iheir store was ten doors east
Of Coenties slip.
q Now tell US what took place then.
MIR. Whiting objected He supposed they could not
give in evidence what took place between the witness
and the defendant They had come to defend indict
mept for false pretence made to SIR Merritt and not
one made to Mr. Trssk. The indictment, on It's face
asrerts that 1essrs Merit. ard Tra.k made loan Of
a thousand dollars which ia true; then it alleges that
the defendant with intent to defraad and chsat
present "to said W. Ii Merritt" so ami so. Then it
alleged that said W. II. Merritt loaned his money and
now, upon this Indictment they could not introduce
false pretence made to suy other person.
The District Attorney argued, that any false pretenoe
made to any OF the fru or to an agent was the same
MT Whiting admitted, II 1t has been laid in the IA
dictmept thai the firm had been defrsutei then that
the representation being made to agent or any men,
Der OF the Arm, ana the firm, believing 10 10 be true,
parted with the money OF the frm would be suioeat
But there such allegation here; there YES
Ia which it had been held thu alleged false represent
alton to could be proved by ehowns one made to 81
Common sense, common Justice, and common proprtsty
forbade IL. The indictment then handed up 20 the
court.
The District Attorney said he had memsrardGn -
which IL appeared that Mc Merritt had tesiAsd os5re
the grand jury as laid 10 the Indictment.
Mr. Whiting knew It vas not the FAULT Of the District
Mr. Han ,ad to avoid difficulty IN future he deeaed
1t safer take verdict under the tstute o arqusfa
the ground Of variance between the ndictm nt aud
the proof when wouli leave them e liberty to ndict
again.
Mr. Whiting was willing TO give STIMULATION that no
advantage would be taken as to the form q any otns
Indictment.
Transaction wss consummated between him End the -.
fepasnt.
The Recorder thought there was certainly variance
eud the beet course would be to comply WITH the District
Attorneys suggestion
Mr. whiting contended that the indic.ment was not
sustained az all by the evidence and that bis client ouah
rot to go forth to the world With the etierus that
attach If acquitted ouly By variance technical OBJ
lection he was entitled 70 full acliti on his char
ihe had already obsiSed great publicity; and hey
submitted ttis would DO great hardship. lie
guilty on this indictment.
The District Attorucs had nc IDEA Of defendant going
forth vbttewashed liz the verdict Of a Jury when
fs acquitta Vas he Insisted toley on tho ground o.