New-York tribune., 1873-12-20
AN AsSEMBLYMAN CONVICTED.


indictment charging him with false pretenses in the OBJ
tanning OF warrant for 7jO which has occupied nearly
week. concluded yesterday, and the case was left
with the jury. Mr.. Peckham resumed his summing up,
which had been broken OF by the gathering darkness the
evening BEFORE and continued until 1890 when Judge
Daniels delivered his charge. The main portion OF IL
was as usual devoted review OF the evidence. with
comments the clearer perception of the jury Toward
the last he alluded to one point for the guidance
OF the Jury which had escaped the attention
or or been purpOsely omitted by the counsel
point arising Of the fact that the evidence might
fail 20 satisfy the jury that these representations,
although set foot 10 order to produce the execution
this by the Mayor did not have that ehect
in this Instance. Judge Daniels told the jury that II
they were not satisfied that the Mayor was induced by
means false to sign his name though
the defendant intended to cheat and defraud the city,
the circumstances would not be those of consummated
crime but the jury could convict OF an attempt TO COM
init the crime. Mr.. Beach promptly took an exception
TO this ruling, aud, when the jury retired requested
that the indictment be left with them' evidently con-
that its tenor would not permit of such con-
struetion.
SUMMING UP OF Mr.. PEcKHAM.
Mr. Peckham, in the beginning OF his argument, de-
fned the charged against Genet, and what acts
were necessary In 10 identify him with the CON-
mission OF the ofense To obtain persons signature
by false pretenses was not necessary that single
word should be uttered. man paying for goods with
a check on bank, when he knows he has no account
there, is an instance of false pretense and so man
putting the cap and gown of an Oxford student and
purchasing goods convicted of false pretense, he
haviug been trusted with the goods supposed stu
dent.
In this COO had been received for the purchase
OF iron for the Courthouse in March Iron was ordered
from ODonneu and delivered in July Meanwhile. the
defendant. though only counsel TO the Commissioners
gets Davidson in June TO draw bill for iron amount
lug to s75O. 1t is headed Bought of Davidson Co.,
for January TO June iron beams &c. on contract as per
agreement with the Commissioners" Would any man,
inquired the prosecutor, put the amount the bill
the person purchasing understood the goods were yet
be deveredi Why put down January, February,
March. April May, and June in the margin, as if the
goods for these months. when they were yet TO
be delveredi 1t was idle to mention the construction
s Tn was Just the Rnd ppfT Of the law
wanted 70 put aown' ~ was crime ea an % d
drawn millions from the Treasury. II was that kind of
Irreguarty that the citzens 10 pay Twice
Mr. Peckham then took up the principal point OF the
prosecution that The bill the inducement which
Obtained the Mayors signature The bill. he argued,
was the main thing the stamps corticates and sigma
Mayor did remember that particular bn he swore
the reason he signed the warrant In all cases was be-
Mr.. Peckham having mentioned incidentally that The
Court house cost several hundred onousahd aoias M
Waterbury interrupted rather warmly that the counsel
knew ought to know that the entire cost was under
and ought to know what he was talking about How
this was Of d piece with the WhOle prosecution
testified that it cost between s2OOOO and 100000 Mr..
Peokhsm here consulted with clerk from the District
Attorneys office ana announced that he had just been
told the amount drawn on warrants which was S26SOOO
while the outstanding bills were $4,000 lie ddut un-
dersand why he should be expected 10 know II the wit
ness didn't wouldn't speak the truth.
hr. PeckBam commented severely upon the testimony
Keeping the $500 or nearly that sum- in his pocket IL
bills ior month though the IRON for the Court House
needed. The contradiction III ScalIons testimony
was also adverted TO- where he said that on receiving
the ti75O from Genet, ana being told that Davidson
would not furnish the iron. he ordered the iron from
ODonneu 1t the latter of July that Genet
says he gave him that money scalon says he hereupon
ordered that iron OF ODonnel telling him he had the
Now the bill shows that the IRON was delivered
In June previous.
while taking fully into account the importance OF
diet OF conviction to the prisoner his family and friends,
general public OF justice against criminals especially
criminal officers The defendant 1t was true, was not
watch carefully their action upon the eviaence winch
was before tue public as well as before them
JUDGE DASIELs's CHARGE.
Judge Daniels then charged the jury, beginning as
follows
GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY: The defendant in this
charged in the indictment against him by the Grand
jury and on which he Is now on tria wn IN 'e 0Iese
instrument for the payment OF money with the intent
New.York by means false aud fraudulent representa-
tons In order to constitute the crime which s in-
IL
shall satisfy your minds beyond reasonable
doubt that false representations we're made by the
defendant 10 the authorities OF the city ana TO tne Mayor
~ tbe oy resulting in the procurement OF the sigma
ture OF the Mayor 10 this warrant and the drawing OF
the money by the defendant in this case with intent 10
cheat and defraud 1t is necessary for you to nnd the
defendant guilty not only that these be
shown have been falsely made but In addltlonThat
their influence on the Mayors mind resulted in procur-
ing his signature TO this warrant under the eiIeuu
the mart OF the defendant cheat and defraud the city,
growing Of the circumstance that he himself AZ the
time these representations were made knew tney were
false and were made for the purpose of deeeyng the
authorities You have undoubtedly notlced the TACT
Wheu the statute under which this case brought wac
read TO you. that il embraces two classes OF case-
First where property is procured or SIGNATURES Oy
ing or simply by means Of false representations. III
was claimed it did not come within the provisions o he
60 tine construction which the statute has
borne but that does not relieve the dfhcuty uhder n
tbe false preteDse or false Representatives,
NAV fail in the other cases enumerated 10 the
statute and which was the policy OF the Legislature
70 uroyde against 1t Is equally crime whether per
by false representation procured Signature 10 an
IA writing provided 1t results In communicating the
Transaction The question arises & mere nv % s
made of instrument was false pretehte 1y winch
che case Is substantially sustained by the evidence
Judge Daniels continued that III TINS case wae hoi
essential 70 consider the class OF eases 1t appeared
by the testimony that May June, ls7 the defend
ant, In consequence OF some previous cohsiucIauons
applied TO MI. Davidson for some work and materials
for the Harlem Court house. II important TO IN
ouire whether there was then dawniug intention not
10 get goods for the city but money from the city foI
his pocket He called their attention 10 the bill
Itself. in which months mentioned and IN when
there a charge for carriage.
Mr. Davidson testified that there had been previous
dealings between him aud the Commissioners, but this
ne first dealing at the Instance OF the defendant
Ie form OF the bill was important for their oOnsidera
ton Mr. Davidson told them that this made out IN
.h,s form al the suggestion OF the defendant The de-
denied this and also that he suggested the put
inS on of the months as indicating that the goods had
s.een 1,rnished They were 10 judge which told the
,rnh he knew nothing In this case going 10 dscredt
Mr. Ds svidsons testimony If he had no motive 70 mis
raors.e,,s r the transaction, IL was for them 10
isSSse AZ whose instance 1t was made II was M
Important circumstance IN considering the intent Ia
t1 conrradetjous between hun and Mr.. Genet they
o,d remember the urgent and c?gent reasons leading