The Sweetwater enterprise. (Sweetwater, Tenn.) 1869-187?, 1871-02-09
THE BUTLER FORGERY CASE.
Trial Off. II. Butler on the Charge
of Forging the Name of a Pension
er-Failure of theFrOsecutiOn and
Acnnital of The Accused.
From lie Washington Patriot, Jan. 2S.


months has had its attention directed to
Roderick II. Butler, member of Congress
from Tennessee, in connection with charge
duplicating him with forgery OF pension
checks in fraud of two pensioners in tho
State, was to-day relieved by the abandon
ment of the prosecution in face of over
whelming proof that the accused acted
under legally delegated authority, and in
good faith to the Government and his eli
ents. lie stood indicted for forging the
endorsement of Mrs. Berthama Farmer
upon a check of the Raleigh, N. g., Ma
tional Bank, dated Oct. 20, 1869, for
S473.l2 the amount then due on her PEN
sion certificate, and also forging the en-
dorsement of Rebecca j. MaddrOn, upon
check of same date and bank, for Sl2O.-
65, likewise due as pension to that time.
The defence challenged the jurors, Bonja-
min Summey, Abraham Dcpew, Il. j..
Wood, and James W. Barrett, whose
places were supplied by others, whereup-
on District Attorney Fisher opened the
case to the jury, recting the facts thereof
as they came to his knowledge, and which
will be sufficiently gathered from the fol-
lowing admission in writing signed and
submitted by the counsel Of the respec-
tive parties.
ADMISSION OF THE DEFENDANT.
United States VS.. ROderick X. Butler,
arraigned in two indictments, as herein
before mentioned.
In the above cases it is admitted by the
defendant, that on the 22d day Of October,
1869, he wrote to Charles IL. Belyin, u.
s. Pension Agent, at Raleigh, N. g., re-
questing him (Belvin) to forward to him
(defendant) the checks described in the
indictments, respectively; that in purSu-
ance of said request Belvin obtained from
the Raleigh National Bank the checks de-
scribed in the indictment, and on the 26th
day of October the defendant endorsed
the name of Berthamy Farmer upon the
one check and that Of Rebecca j. MaddrOn
upon the other, said Farmer and MaddrOu
being then in North Carolina, and under
said endorsement wrote his own endorse
ment, and passed said checks to the bank
ing house of j. Cooke Il Co., at Washing
ton; that said checks we're received, eu-
dorsed, aud passed as aforesaid by defend
ant at Washington, d. G. In making this
admission, however, defendant AYERS that
in the case, No. 1913, he had proper au-
thofity in writing from Berthamy Farmer
authorizing him to make said endorsement
and in No. 1874 he had the oral authOri-
zation Of Rebecca j. Maddron to endorse
her name and draw the money on said
checks respectively"
Fisher and Harrington for the Govern
men; Riddle, Miller and DAvidge for th5
defendant.
BY agreement of council the reading of
TIE indictments was waived and the de-
fendant entered plea of not guilty. 1t
was determined to try the defendant Oh
the indictments separately.
The Government then called their prin-
cipal witness, the prosecutriX, whom it
soon became apparent, from her manner
of testitying, is possessed of scarcely an
ordinary degree Of intelligence. She dis
claimed all recollection OF ever making her
mark 20 any papers prepared by the de-
fendant except the printed blanks used in
making up the original application for her
pension, but could not swear positively
that she did not execute others. She tes-
titled to signing, by mark, paper prepar-
ed by Solomon Ham, a justice of the
peace, from memoranda furnished by the
DrUsecutrlx, containing statements of pur-
chases from time to time at Mr.. Buffers
store at Taylorsville, Tenn, but witness
was unable to give an opinion as to whoth-
er the aggregate of her purchases amount.
ed to $5O or $l00-she had no idea what
ever OF it. She said she had bought few
goods Of Mr.. Butler, and he once let her
have $50, and that is all she had received.
The paper alleged to have been executed
before Justice Ham was shown her, and
upon its being read to her she replied that
sit sounded mighty like the paper she
signed" but she could not swear positive
ly.
The power of attorney alleged to have
been executed by her to Mr.. Butler, be-
fore a notary public in Mr.. Buffers Office.
named Donuelly, and present witnesses,
Nathan Brooks and wife and two clerks,
named Smith aud Butler, (the latter the
defendants son. was shown Mrs. Farmer
who denied signing it. She was also
shown vouchers and other papers from time
to time executed by her in the course OF
the prosecution and collection of her claim
all of which she thought she did not sign.
but would not swear positively. The
council produced duplicate list of inter.
rogatories prepared at the Pension Office
and forwarded to Mrs. Farmer for her an
swers, which they received, but which she
also denied having given. She said she
did not learn until last June or July (and
then from man named Belvin) that hel
application for pension had been sue.
cessful. Her husband was soldier in the
late war, and died in 1865. She had two
children but could not tell the age o.
either.
Frederick NJ. Clark, a clerk in the Pen
sion Office, testified to the preparation o
the list OF lnterrogatOrles sent Mrs. Farm
er from that office through the Postmis
tress Taylor, at Horse Greek, N. G., ant
identified the copy shown him as the ont
fled by the defendant.
The prosecution here rested their case.
THE DEFENCE.
A. 7. DOnnelly, the notary public be
fore spoken Of, testified that he was prac
ticing lawyer in Tennessee, aud that HI
was we'll acquainted with Mrs. Farmer
whom he recognized in the court room
Witness was shown the power Of attorney
purporting to have been executed and ac
knowledged before him, and he swore pos
it;vely to the identity and authenticity o
the paper. 1t was dated Oct. 8, 1868
and was full and unconditional powe
| Of otfornau fa Mr. II to o;0n Ior u,n,o