New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-27


and therefore he would he liable for tho forgery
h, ou SOC there are two points be determined to
,r .at,sactononc Is that the person actually wro'o
tho name himself the other that be procured IL 10 Do
done by the hand OF another There uhgn' oo
caao vhera man who has signed name
might he innocent Of any intention to commit forgery
for ne might have supposed that tho person who di
rreted him 10 do SO had authority II you are satisfied
that the defendants either wrote the name themselves
or eonsplred together with the understanding and ar
rapcemcut that some else 60 write 1t, then you
must convict them To constitute the crime OF forgery
there must be an absence of authority the part of tho
person whose name is used
Now, the theory OF the prosecution Is this lhat 'c
defendants or of them. for the purpose OF getting
money from the county, prepared claim OF some soo
making out formal bill OF items. that that pil was
fraudulent one made out in the name OF heath
an tinct lrm, because 1t would not GO 10 hAho o nv
oil In the maine Of any person with whom ohe vi ho
Commissioners, Ingerson. was conneeted-yiz', the
Heath d Smith Manufacturing Compapy-Wncn, "Uu,'
excite attention and suspicion anu tn' nS ~. 80
therefora q fraudulent one since Heath Smitn ma
no claim against the county OF lle character SCI
bill was made out with the formaltes requisite to Sc
cure audit apd ment IL bears AZ 'he pottO'n
sworn to n IA followed by q certificate 10 the cor
rectness Of the account signed py james n SyISh
Thomas Conan, Michael Norton, ana Johh .. n"isp;
Then 1t is followed by printed form OF receipt n1t
filed up all, which states the receipt o. PAYNE
is claimed that these defendants went through the va
mons forms necessary for obtaining the warrant aud
payment IL necessary TO prove the various transac
tons leading inIo the crime, and that Is inc
reason ali this evidence has been brought be-
fore yon that you may ascertain tho pur-
PPSe au a Sa Hal IpSersoi K FarrnSton wishing
tain money FROM the county caused this account 10 DC
made up in its present form, and pat thg names Oh
Heath q Smith claimants, went through the various
stages necessary TO obtain the warrant ana lnd0rsed'
or caused TO be ind0Ised' the name Oh heath q oihh
Judge Davis went through the items of the BILL men
oning particularly the 800 umbrella stands winch cost
5000 and caused much laughter in court weh the
items first read, aud which the Ju1sc SAID pore no
date when they were furnished. 49,.
This case 80 iar the evidence on this subject
sand Judge DAVE mo- ires trYm doubt In my luaTT
this respect While 1t is quite clear that IL Is nov sntn
or Heath, there is more than an expression vi oi
ion in some instances nom knowledge ana from one eA
pert The expert testihes that from an examual2 ue
believes that the signatures are in the same handWr
as the body OF the b. II is obvious that they not
genuine signatures either Of Heath or Smith but were
put there By some other person. Who that was you
cannot TELL but you tell that Dec. So 1870, wat
rant was issued $4,000. You tell that that war
rant required the Endorsement Of Heath Smith, as II
was In their name and payable to their order.
You can tell that tDat same day the defendant IN
CerO deposited that warrant in the BOwery Bank ana
received the money. Now the paper on Dee ~ was III
the hands OF ingerson, requiring he ndoFsenent OF
Heath Il smith and II was deposited the same dly ~
not appear that this paper was in the hands OF anybody
on The effect Ol these tactS Is Tor You 10
drfqrmne Whether il Was "a fraudulent account Is
SO much the question before you as whether IL was
fraudulent account prepared for such purpose Without
their consent The testimony TO the contrary Is tronI
Mr. FairinGton one of the defendants. All that the
Court can SAY in relation his testimony that is 10
be considered 10 the light OF bis relations 10 this case
The iury will bear mind that such testimony IS given
in art 10 exculpate himsef As TO Mr. Heath referring
to the conversation the rs To his feelings toward
the defendants what witness says of the stand IS 10
be taken in reference his credbilty on the stand
SAID 10 be part OF the great frauds per
petrated IN this county ILLUSION has been made TO the
eases tiled here WITHIN week Although these frauds
have committed and have been proved II Is your
duty TO look at this the Hight OF evidence rather
tnan IN light of what you may believe. III you hd
thar this was of great scheme OF fraud WEefe-
by the county been robbed and that these persons
were concerned IN THIS or several you can give IL
such weight rs you tbiuk proper IL j. proper t1at
public officers, holding such offices rs ngers0ll nelu,
should he held 10 strict account III they
the community they should certainly be pun
ished. Ordinary crimes are generally committed by
persons driven by poverty or necessity, but with pub
he officer who commits oitenses such charged
here there Is always cO0lueSs deDeraou, and deter
upatOn in the accomplishment, that DO not show mere
temporary weakness the driving effect OF desperation
and starvation, the mere outburst OF anger, but
deliberate intention to rob and plumber those whom they
are bound b. law protect. There should fall upon
them ready conviction and severe punishment II you
think this VI that kind Is your duty not TO iet
TO have been guilty, 1t Ia your duty 10 acquit.
Mr. Fullerton presented few requests to charge III
respect to those bearing upon the fact OF another pun
ishment for misconduct III public officers aud TO the
effect of reasonable doubt, short charges were made
by Judge Davis Exceptions taken 10 the requests
denied and those he deemed nsuficenty charged by
Mir Fullerton