Delaware weekly Republican. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1841-188?, 1857-06-18

D 1853.
Patrick Shearer, sworn.-Reside in Philade
!, plla, knew Allen Voorhees, for 20 years. lila
i I pHslhess with him on the 26th of Decembe
q i9oV' Went together to Gray's hotel, wheI
I. fornees asked him to take drink. He aftei
wards saw him two or three times that day. II
, s occasion TO take up q note, and remember
Gu ne circumstance by the reference to hi
NJ NJ ek oook. He however, did not go to tn
mayors Office to communicate these facts.
samuel l.. Mckinney, sworn.-Live in Phil
ueiphla, knew Allen voorhees, % years. Say
; iilii I, on the morning of the 18th OF December
on seventh street, near Chesnut. Saw hin
Two or three times in the day. Voorhees, callet
oh MN some months afterwards aud stated tina
ne had boon arrested, and would call on him t.
uestiiy before tho Mayor in regard to having
hGt nm on the 2Gth Of December. He ncyei
called, however, as he was shortly after taker
AWAY on the requistion Of the Governor o
Capt. Maxwell, recalled.-Mr. Farls wa.
teller OF the Delaware City Bank. The officers
Of the Bank were President Cashier and Tel
Ter. Mr.. Faris paid tho money on the forged
checks. There was no person employed in the
place OF Mr.. Faris while he was absent, hi
never being away over day with the excep
ton OF the time be went to Rutland. The Banl
paid his expenses, and the item was charged il
the expense account. There was no action o
the Board Of Directors ordering this payment
and no consultation in regard TO it, but saw
that i had been done. There was nothing
in the minutes of the Board of Directors
on this subject. Tho expense book WA
Kept by the Cashier. He did not know by
whose authority the expenses of Mr.. Faris wert
PAID The Directors could see the book l
they chose to look at it, but it was never sub
mltted to their inspection.
Cross-examined.-It was not customary Ia
get an order to purchase small articles or pay
petty expenses. The bank paid fee of $50 ia
. lawyer for drawing up an indictment also
$40 for expense OF Capt. Maxwell in going to
Rutland. This, however, had nothing to do
with the case of Vorhees-it was after lolie
pros. had been ordered, and he went there on
tho strength of a letter received from Mr.. Nor
ton. He remembered the conversation with
Mr.. Callahan, but he was under the impression
that it occurred after the requsition had been
made by tho Governor. He remarked in
casual way that mistake had been made in
me lnah-that Voorhees, was in Philadelphia,
TIE day when the forgery was committed.
Tho plaintiffs here closed the case.
MIR. Bates stated that there were some consid-
erltions which might be developed at this time,
and in case the court agreed with them much
time might thereby be saved. He argued that
the plaintiffs had not shown that the Bank in
its corporate capacity had instituted this suit
and the stockholders could not be liable for
malicious prosecution. TWAS not the business
of the corporation to prosecute criminal often
ders, No such authority could be found in the
charter Of the Bank and it couldnot rightly be
made responsible for any damages which might
accrue to any party on account Of the action of
the Board of Directors. Their acts would be
entirely without warrant, beyond the authority
of the charter, and therefore they were liable
only in their personal capacity. lie spoke for
over an hour and cited various authorities to
prove his position. Notwithstanding his effort,
however, to procure nonsuit, the Court de- |
termned that the case should go before the |
jury.
Mr.. Bradford remarked that they had made |
four propositions, and if they sustained one of |
them the Court should dismiss the case.
The Court, however, said the case should go |
10 the jury, and the points raised could be do |
cided afterwards.
Mr.. Bradford addressed tho jury at some |
ength, setting forth that certain torgeries had |
been committed in 1853, and that two checks /
had been passed on tho Delaware City Bank,
1y which Sl700 WAS wrongfully procured from
t. He argued that there was no malicy in the
prosecution of Voorhees,, &c.
VIM. Faris sworn-In March 1854 he was
shown letter from the Chief of Police in 1
Philadelphia, TO Capt. Maxwell, setting forth
hat an individual was suspected of having
committed the forgery on the Delaware City
bank. On this he went to Philadelphia. In
december man presented a check at the Del
ware City Bank, on the Farmers Bank, marked
food by w. W. Torbert, which he paid. On
lie 10th of December tho man came ntu the |
Bank again, anu stated that he would be much |
obliged II he could be accommodated with |
more funds on the same kind of paper. That |
ne wished to make payment in the lower end
OF the county, and he found it more convent
ent to carry certified checks than money, they
accordingly cashed two checks for him. One
of $500 the other for 5000, certified by Rob-
ert ID. Hicks, cashier OF the Farmers Bank of
Wilmington, The checks were sent to Will
mington, and in duo course of time were re-
turned as forgeries. On going to Philadel-
phia, no gave Il description to Mr.. Buckley,
chief of police, of tho person who committed
me forgery. An officer present remarked
hey had tho man. TO this Mr.. Buckley re-
Dlled with nod. He then went out Of the
)Ihce with an officer, when Mr.. Voorhees, was
pointed out. Ho observed him closely, and
he likeness was very striking. To this he |
made affidavit, and Voorhees, was afterwards |
rrested. Mr.. Faris was present at the hear
nS before the Mayor when Voorhees, was pres
mt with his Council. No other witness was
Not a word was said about his be-
nS able to prove his innocence. Voorhees, did
ot speak only in a whisper He was induced
D go TO Vermont by information that Voorhees,
'as the wrong man. lie went at once to the
,herltf OF the County, and stated his business.
lie was brought into u room whore he could
bservc the prisoner, and he was satisfied that
e was the criminal, aud that Voorhees, was not
utility of the charge. He returned to Della
'arc city at once, and tho prosecution in the
ase was stopped. There was q striking re-
embance between Voorhees, and Gill.
Cross examined.--When he saw Gill in
.utland prison, he was satisfied that he was
no man who committed the fOrgeres. He
'as never really positive that Mr.. Voorhees,
'as the man. The Grand Jury found the bill
gallst MIR. voorhees, on his testimony in con-
ection with that of Mr.. Hicks. He did not
now on whose instance Mr.. Hawkins had gone
0 Philadelphia, the State paid the expense OF
Expeditions of that kind. lie knew of no ar
angement between the Bank and the officers
New Castle. MIR. Bradford acted as Coun-
81 in tho case, having been employed by Mr..
laxwell. Tho man who drew the money from
nc Bank had q foreign accent. IIe did not
car Voorhees, talk, although he had told MIR.
buckley that he should make an arrangement
y which he could hear Voorhees, talk, but this
as forgotten. He thought Mr.. Voorhees, was {
lller than Gill.
Mr.. Buckley--Recalled.- Lieutenant {
t the police at the time the iOrgeres were
Tho letter sent by him to Capt.
IaXwell was here proved. He sent the letter
u aeGuuht VI oTHeeS COHHeCllOu WIN JIM. )
lorton, n notorious forger of Bank Checks, i,
Ir. Faris called on him, and after describing
ne fOrger, went out with an officer, and after !
aids returned and made the affidavit. The :
lanner Of Farls was very cautious. He re- ,,
larkcd that the person who had been shown =
i'm, looked very much like the person who
ommtted the forgery. The police were anx-
rus to keep the matter quiet, until they were
ortain that they had secured tho right mani !
nnrsOu resided in Wilmington whom thay | y
lso suspected. 1t was several weeks after the /
rrest before he hoard that Mr.. Voorhees, was in /
Philadelphia when the forgery was committed. Q
10 did not attach any importnnce to tho stntr- o