Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-11-06

Court of Common Pleas for the Trial
of Criminal Cases.
OCTOBER TERM 1857
Commonwealth VS.. Henry W. Bala,oin.

win lett Cincinnati for New York, nor till l went
TO Columbus. Eastman was to have salary Of
$1,000, if we employed him. After Baldwin went
to New York. Eastman went on, at Baldwin's re-
quest, for the purpose of soliciting cOnsgnments
in Western Massachusetts. / furnished him with
Sl0O to pay his expenses Baldwin wrote me
letter from Cumberland, Md, before Eastman
left | think l sent word to Baldwin that | was
willing to take Eastman as a partner / cannot
tell the exact day Baldwin left. l think 1 saw
Baldwin, Eastman, my father, and my brother
John at the Aston House together the first time
went. Baldwin did not telegraph for me to come
on. He telegraphed for me to telegraph to my
brother Newton to meet him, but did not Bald
win did not seem to want me there, and got me
off as soon as he could. He said that three hun
bred boxes of goods had gone on, and that it was
necessary that 1 should be In Cincinnati to at
tend TO them, and | accordingly left. / wrote
to my brother John, at Badwin's request, to
meet him in New York. Baldwin wanted to see
Joon. and | wanted he should see him. l ex-
pected Baldwin would settle his affairs in Balti-
more, and wanted he should see him in refer
ence to the subsequen arrangements. When
Baldwin, Eastman, my father, and myself, met
in New York, we did not make arrangements for
the partnership l found Baldwin trying to Dor.
row $4,000 of my father, and was trying to pre-
vent it. When left New York, to attend to the
goods which Baldwin said he had sent on. the I'M
Outstanding was, that Baldwin and Eastman
should see wtaft could be done, in procuring con-
sigaments, 81 the arrangement went On.
When | came to Shrewsbury, in July, l did not
represent Baldwin that proposed to go into the
State Journal at Columbus during the campaign.
1 bought III as permanent business engagement
Baldwin found fault with my not going with
our arrangement and asked me what he should
do. | told him he might 60 On with the business,
himself, if he could. "a letter was here intro.
duced, and Identified written by Schouler to a
friend near Philadelphia, Mr.. Simpson, which was
given by him to Baldwin when the latter came
East. stating that he had entered into copart-
nership with him in the commission goods bust
ness.l obtained $50 Of Baldwin when | came
on here in July. An extended inquiry was here
made of Col. SchOuleT. as to his Indebtedness at
the time OF the sale of the Gazette, of the sums
of money he paid out about that time, and Of his
previous transactions with Baldwin, the purpose
OF which was not obvious to one not acquainted
with the grounds of the defence, and which
would not probably eulghten the reader. To
questions whether Col. s. had not borrowed sun
dry specified sums of money of Baldwin, in the
Spring OF 1856, he answered TO each that he had
not. Letters, &c were then put in, which were
explained, as referring to the loan Of $1,000, and
the manner in which it was paid by him.
D1ect.-The letter to Simpson given to
Baldwin, to be used only on condition that he
should first settle his affairs at Baltimore. and
comply with the other conditions of the proposed
arrangements Explanations were here given,
OF letters which had been put in by the defence.
in course of which Col S said that Baldwin told
him, while in New York, that he hud settled his
Indebtedness at Baltimore, and sent on 800 pack
ages of goods
Nathaniel p Duty II have been in the boot
and shoe business in Boston, since 1852. l was
in business with Baldwin two or three months,
commencing in November, 1854 Baldwin owed
some notes in Baltimore in 1856 The notes
we're sent by me in November, 1854, to De Ford
< 20 and other parties. They have since been
in the hands of Richard Fuller. They amount
70 $1,000 or $4,000 They were signed H. W.
Baldwin Co, payable to rue or order. In Oe-
tober, 1856, Baldwin and / met in State street.
Boston. I asked him why be did not settle the
Baltimore notes as he agreed to- by paying 25
cents on the dollar. He said that, at the time he
proposed it, he expected to 60 into business with
Col. SchouleJ, but Schouler could not raise the
money he was to, and the partnership was not
consummated, and he had not been to Baltimore
since. He SAID that no copartnership was ever
formed between him and Schouler Such copart.
nership was talked Of, but was not entered into,
because s. could not raise the money. Two
months ago the Baltimore notes were not settled.
sass $1,000 e....s e =. SOLD that Isaac
and about going into partnership with him. he
SAID there never had been any partnership be.
tween him-a Newton or Schouer / sent the
notes to Baltimore endorsed by me, to settle
private debts OF my own. have since been dis
charged as endorser, by giving my own private
notes. The Baltimore notes we've given me by
Baldwin, tor boots and shoes purchased by him
VI mt" nSJ were IOT ROOuS ana money. 1neY
were dated the 18th OF November, but were given
later. There were ten of them, ranging from
goo to $1,000 each. We were doing business
together in November, but were not in partner
snip. Balwin put up sign-"Baldwn, Duty, &
Coin Cincinnati. l was in Boston | went
to Cincinnati and sold the balance of the goods
remaining in the store, but the sale did not stand,
as Baldwid said he had already sold them | did
not buy any goods in the name of Baldwin Duty
Co., OF William Baker of this city. bought
goods in Boston and sent them TO Cincinnati. l
paid for them myself l do nor know whether
the bill for them was made in the name of Bald
win, Duty, & Co.
The testimony on the part of the Government
waa here closed.
AFTERNOON.
The counsel for defence having no testimony
to introduce, introduced statement which, on
agreement with the District Attorney, it was ad
mitted would be testified to by Joab Hapgood if
he were present, and it was read to the jury as
testimony, as follows:
Joel Hapgood-Saw Schouler in Columbus. in
the Winter of 1856, when he said he had formed
$1,000.
Col. Schouler, recalled by the Government
doinot know Joab Hapgood. l never saw him
In Columbus, to my knowledge. l never stated
to him or to any human being that had formed
eopartnership with Baldwin.
The testimony here closed Before commenc.
ing the arguments, Mr.. Chaplin, for the defence,
filed paper, stating what he should assume as
points of law, in making his argument, in sub
stance as follows;
II the name was written under such circum-
stances that Phelps was presumed to know that
Baldwin alone was liable for it;
If the firm would have been liable chad there
been one) if the proceeds OF the note had pur-
ported to be for Schouler, Baldwin, & Co.;
II Baldwin could have made himself and
schouler liable as partners to any third party;
1t Baldwin had reasonable cause to believe he
had authority to bind the company on any con.
tract;
If Baldwin supposed that he had authority to
use the name of Schouler, Baldwin, & Co., in any
case
If Schouler and Baldwin were partners, as to
third persons in either of these cases, it was not
forgery.
Whether Schouler and Baldwin were partners
or not, note, given under the circumstances
stated by Phelps, would not be forgery.
Mr.. Chaplin then proceeded with his argument
which was an able one, occupying about two
hours
District Attorney Aldrich then proceeded with
the concluding argument for the Government.
MEcHANIcs' ASSOCIATION LECTURES. = The
Introductory lecture of the course was delivered
at the Society's hall last evening, by Hon. N. P.
IsI ~