Gallipolis journal. [volume] (Gallipolis, Ohio) 1837-1919, 1869-03-25

premises were subjected to thorough
examination; some papers were takei
away; think an envelope was taken
from Edward room.
Peter Lewis examined-Went to tht
Post-offiee in Gallipolis, last March, t.
mail a small box containing a ring, ad
dressed to James Beale, to be taker
across the river, by the ferryman, tC
the Virginia side; think stamp wa:
placed on the box.
Cross ss-examined-The ferryman was
not the postmaster, and this was moi
the mail service.
James NJ, H. Beale examined-Nev
er received the box referred to by the
last witness; went to DR.. Newton as
soon as / knew it was lost; he wrote 8
notice of the loss, which was placed on
the inside of the post-ofiice; Ed. said be
had given the ring 10 the ferryman's
boy.
Frank Neal examined-Liye in Gal
hpolis, and have known Edward New
ton for two or three years; he showed
me 800 altogether at one time; there
was $50 note and some small bills;
it was at the Post Office. He asked
me to tell his father the $50 was mine;
he did not tell me how he got it. This
was the only time he showed me any
money. He said some one had told his
father about his carrying a large
amount of money in his pocket; can t
tell what month it was.
Henry L. Miller examined--Am a
merchant at Gallipolis. On November
26th, | mailed letter, containing a
$50 note, to my sister. The letter was
not registered, and was addressed to
the care j. G. Towers, ia West
Fourth street; have never seen the let
ter since. 1t was lost on the way.
Another letter, addressed to the Gin
cinnati Times Office, containing SO for
newspaper subscription, was also
lost; don't remember when that was
sent.
William l.. Piercy examined-Have
charge of the Registry Department in
the Cincinnati Post-ofice; at one time
found an envelope open at one end,
about half way across; found the inclo-
sure correct, with the exception of the
bill. 1t was not there; when i first
examined the outer envelope l did not
notice that it had been cut; it was par
TALLY closed up; Mr.. Baker indorsed the
return letter receipt, "Without inclo-
sure" drew up an affidavit stating
the facts; Mr.. Baker was the chief
money-order clerk; had cut all the
packages on my table before | saw this
had been opened; took it over to Mr.
Baker, Immediately, and requested
him to examine it; he took out the buff
envelope, he examined it and there was
only paper in 1.-THE remittance letter;
| saw Mr.. Baker open the buff en-
velope, and as soon as he opened it |
saw there was no bill in it; we both
then went over to Mr.. Cary; he usually
receives letters of inquiry addressed to
the postmaster; if letter of inquiry
regarding missing package is receiv-
ed, Mr.. Cary brings it to me and I
make report on it; there is no record
kept of these letters of inquiry, so far
as l know.
THIRD DAY,
Thomas P Shallcross, special agent
of the Post-office Department, testified
that under the present system of carry
ing the mails, if a registered letter were
mailed at Kanawha Courthouse for
Cincinnati, Gallipolis would be the only
office where a record of it would be
kept. 1t would there be placed in a
through pouch, which would not be
opened until it reached Cincinnati.
The record shows that registered pack
age No. 90 was received at Gallipolis,
November Ia; record is in DR.. New
toms handwriting. AT the time of
DR.. Newton's arrest witness told him
that his son had said he got salary of
S 500; the Doctor said it was not true
that he allowed him to take money
from the drawer when he wanted it.
here tried to trace the 500
note in Gallipolis, to find where 1t had
been changed, but failed in the effort.
VIM. Werlich, George Smith and
James Callan, porters employed in the
Cincinnati postoffiee, testified as to the
manner in which mails were received
ov them. The bags Immediately after
heir delivery were opened and the let
ers sorted; the registered letters were
brown into separate bag and taken
nto the Registry Department.
Mr.. Hooper. Assistant United States
District Attorney, here stated that the
Government had offered all the testi-
nony at their disposal, and would rest
heir case.
The first witness called for the de-
ense was C. W. Thomas, postmaster
# Cincinnati. He stated that no rec
'rd was kept in his Office of letters of
inquiry in regard to lost packages or
etters. Such letters were frequently
eceived, but were usually returned to
he writers, an answer being written
n the same sheet. Since he had taken
possession of the Office he had not been
BILE to trace single loss of valuable
nail matter; never had occasion to lis
barge any of his clerks for dishonesty.
lr. Baker, the money order clerk, had
esigned his position because he thought
e could do better. He was very
fficient, trustworthy officer.
W. Carey, clerk in the Cincinnati
ost-ofice, was then called, and testi-
ed regarding the letters of inquiry re-
arding lost registered letters. Letters
f this kind were received at intervals
f probably one or two weeks. On be-
lg received the register was consulted
} find out whether or not the package
lquired for had been received, and an
nswer was returned accordingly.
udge He eadington then proposed to in
'oduce testimony to prove the good
haracter of DR.. Newton, but on the
atement of the Assistant District At