New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-04-22
TIE LAY COOKE & co. FORGERY.

Tho fact that on the 12ih inst. the sum Of
s1fG8 vr, Drawn from the Bank Of the State OF New
vu by persons presenting checks purporting to have
hron Issued by jay Cooke & Co.. has been set forth ~
largo m ruE TRIBUNE. There seems 70 be dspni" De-
tween the firm and the officers Of the bank with refer
encc to the same. Jay Cooke & Co. declare that the
checks vcr, forged and that they In nowise be held
responsible fr Tie payment Of the same. AMI In PROOF 81
thclr assertion produce Their checkDnOh, iu suoH u
the printed numbers Vi tIo uItge" i .n
checks aro duplicates, and cannot, thcrs'
i%r' nave cI Pc, say tSSt they have Submitted tie al
lr,d forged checks 10 experts who, ON comparing them
,o,'rJ A." rnai1rcs Of Pit Cooke aud Mr.. mn, the
cashier ~ tire rm. 10 be genuine. They claim hat me
rc,'rl Win the Office outsider. who has IN some
manner gained access To the checkbook ara aierW"Id
Inc bank officers have charged the amount drawn on
jhc.r forced checks 10 the account OF JAY
II considerable litigation. Indeed, proceedings
in the cJsu have already been commenced;
DIV. ago tie detective police Of this city arrested one
Igfr,. smith ou rNurrn ~ being the man who passed
o. a. De SO rO worth. CITY Judge Bedford before Nhum
hc uccu.cd was takcn committed HIM 20 the Tombs TO
magistrates az the Tomb, Police Court, seemed 10 thlhk
thai c prisoner shou'I have been brought before nm
fnr p,llce having detumrd the prisoner IN police
cell beyond the % hours allowed by law before Dilnfs
~ he H. Justice that had been done HIN. Judge BEDFORD
a., .I 10 tr,u,f n the hearing I'm the % Justice
IlnvItg Atg ocloc, y. M. Tuesday Justice D0Whng
and The counsel for Jay Coor the bank ana the plsohe.
g...l.brd iu "A private room adjoining tho Court ot
SseI. srs-Uus. The prisoner Was brought up by Otcer
O't,otur when The AFFIDAVIT al Henry L. Grant, paying
T. Ter o he National Balk Of ito State Of New-lork was
rcrl lie states that ON tho l2th inst the paper shown
,,uruortug be- check the above Oank Ior the sum
order II Alexander u. Hl. dated New YORK, ApHl ~,
1867 properly stamped nhorsed Pay to the order
a. j. len. Alexander 4. Hl, presented to the dc
roucut by James Smith. the accused, ana pay
mont demanded therefor and that In exchange Tor
lie check Gcpruput gave him tho sum hdmed'
NTH witch smith lcft tho bank. after count
~ The same. Alexander g. I'LL assistant cashier III le
hinkus house ~ jay Cooke Coz testified that lie n1u
rpuurd The paper annexed to the AFFIDAVIT OF Henry L.
q n NJ purpnr'ug 10 be check drawn by jay Cooke q
Co ON National Baak Of the state OF New lork lof
Inc euiu Of 5s7 81 aud pronounces the same
md not made drawn hy any one In TIC employ oil Jay
Cooke q CO. uutLor1cd Ia draw the same Inc cOuh'
a., m the hlIk proposed 10 crosscNamlre tho witnesses,
In order 10 jy that Eo slgnA'u'c' TO the checks we're
mon fbrFrd Justice DOwHs declined To recog'
t'ze either the bank objects. or Jay Cooke
- Co. as the prosecutions III tho CASE
he complain, having been made against tho accused on
iaba al TIE People, ugG AFTER som" argument by cu-
-; tto exam uaIipn Adjourned without day belng
named .or ia clutinuuEcc Why The proceedings shOuu
i.v brcu conducted iu such suspciousy rctlreu ma
r nca not appear, AMI IL Is all tho more strange that
~ ~: .!strr before whom the case was heard was nor
tnni, q To- duty this week, Justice Hogan being
ta tiIu Magistrate at the TOmbs. ana tho case should
su-,rrutly have come before him. Tho public VIII IoOh
" ia interest further developments In TINS case