The New York herald., 1877-12-06
DIR. LAMBERT'S TRIAL.
STRENUOUS EFFORTS OF THE DEFENcE TO
PROVE TECHNICAL INNocENcE-THE DEPUTY

4
PROVE TECHNICAL ISNooENcE-rHE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF INSURANCE ExAAISED.
Another numerous attendance marked the third day
of the trial Of Dr. I. s. Lambert, late President OF
the Popular Life Insurance Company, the charge
OF perjury, having falsely TO the report OF
his company to the superintendent of Insurance. A
score moro people identified with the Insurance
business were on hand as on the two previous days
ExRecorder Smith, senior counsel for the defence,
essaycd bold movement IN the beginning Of the days
proceedings by seeking to discredt the validity OF
the oath taken by tho two leading officers Of the
pany when swearing to their report on the grounds
that the notary pubic, Mcllick, was not resident Of
this State, and furthermore unless the notarys sig
nature could be identified as that of William II.
Mehck, there was end Of tho prosecution. Failing
In counsel insisted that. tho signature of the
accused attached only to the AFFIDAVIT TO
before the notary snd not to the schedule giving tho
assets and liabilities OF the company, he could not bc
held responsible for errors tho latter, as he was
only required to indorse such statements were fur
nishcd nim by the clerks OF the company.
David b. Miller was tho lrst witness examined, and
testified that no was deputy coroner, and issued
certificate OF the death OF Mcliick April "a 1877 Mr.
Smith, counsel for deiendant, cross anined tho
with the view Of hndng out IL the residence OF
tho deceased notary on the certificate Of doatn
Judge Brady-What is the materially oil the ques-
ton?
Mr. Sm!th-rhe matcriality is that II II turns out
that the residence OF the notary was in New Jersey
tho oath taken before him was invald, as the law
quires the notary should be resident OF this state
The question was excluded
joan II. Ford, a clerk OF the Supreme Court was
called 10 prove the mniserng OF the usual oath
named William IL. Acllick, becoming a
notary public. He pointed out the entry Of Meck's
a
whether the signature Meilick's or not; in tact,
he could recall the man. Some time swas con-
sumed between counsel arguing the point 10 tho
identity ot Mclnck With the entry IN the book pro-
duced. Judge Brady said the book spoke ior Itself,
anu the entry must have meant the Mellck in ques.
tlop, as there other OF the name recorded.
ARGUING rEchScALTIEa
Gilbert /. Reader testileJ To Meilick acting as
notary public at inc corner OF Broadway and Canal
street, IN The samc building where tho Popular Iio
Insurance Company was located On question as 10
tho Witness kuowedge Of Mclck's signature
counsel for defendant interrupted anu after
gumcnt proceeded TO read the act OF 1883 prescribing
the kind OF report required 70 bo made 70 The super
Intendcnt OF the Insurance Department by ihc difcr
ent companies, enumcrating niteen items necessary
to be covered. NOW sad Mr.. smith, .thc three
items which It rs charged by tho prosecution sne
doendant falsely represented are not enumerated IN
the fifteen different provisions required by Iawn
Coun sol then read the AFFIDAVIT made by Lambert and
Cruikshank respectively president and secretary Of
the Popular Lie, IN regard 70 the condition OF
the company, lnalsted that the aftdavN
related only TO the entries on the books anu that
If tho books show what the report contained or II
proper Counsel referred 10 the great
insurance company win securities OF 500 000 000 aud
declared wo0ld be Impossible Tor the president OF
that company TO verify, himself, every Item In re-
port and II was so with tho president OF any Other
company He must depend upon those assisting HIM
Tor tho accuracy Of his staLomsnts. Dr. Lambert
six the affidavit, but not tho schedules attached
Mr. Phelps replied that the slidavit which tho
charge OF perjury WAS based was an absolute declara
that tho assets gwen the property OF the
company. The point that the Indictment cannot be
because the schedules attached 70 the ada.
VI aro II d ed ~ n
cause one signature enough for all tho apors in.
elusive.
Judge Brady said by the intsadmsnt Of tho a~ they
subscribed In whole II SUBSCRIBED In part, and
the points raised oy counsel which are likely 70 be
similar 10 those discussed In prior Of the same
nature. no should rule rs MS predecessor Judge
Davis, ruled.
counsel Tor defendant seeking tor evidence tuat the
notary Arllick, ny reason Of his residence, inca
psbso Of taking an affidavit Witness said he did not
know where Acllick lived.
Mr. SmIh-D0 you know whore his family livedP
District Attorney Phelps-I object 10 that Wherc
tho mans family lived has notning 10 do with tho
point IN question.
Mr.. smith-wcl, tho legal assumption Is that whore
O mans iamily lives the man himself lives
District AtLorney-On tho contrary, tho legal us-
sumption 10 all tho olhor way. lLaughierI
Tho counsel on both sdos had grumbling sort OF
argument for wnile and then q recess taken,
alter which the cross-examinaLion OF Reader was
sumcd, Mr.. Smith making an offer TO provo that Mel
lick was resident OF New jersey but The oncr WAS
rejected.
DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT.
"A. r,
Superintendent OF Insurance, who testified that he
made an examination Of the company's books. Nu-
merous objections raised by MT Smith overruled
by the Court Tnc witness produced the books ana
the report showed ,030 outstanding policies,
only three OF which appeared 10 have been paid; he
WAS assisted IN the EXAMINATION by Mr.. keid the
bookkce Mr.. Reid told him nearly all the uncol-
iectcd policies were bogus; they were marked with
blue pcncil 70 tmo; We asked Reid who had been
hxng up the books ana he replied ..No one:' there
the cash book o SAC, 900 cash dis0urseu
Tor conditional certificates; Mr. Keid said II repre-
lQtn hal At lhpV nnd
to do with disbursements no SAID he did not know;
he said there were $500 carried cash that IL
represented stock cnecks; In reply 10 tho question
what that had 10 do with disbursements. ne sad he
uid not know that 1t was not cash tho dclendanti
explanation OF the itcin said, Does II not explain
itselif" told him II dad not that did not think It
cash. and gave as my reason that u could not
be cash Tor the reason that he had 10 borrow 70 goo
from The bank wnere he TO have that
depositcO; when the superintendent came down
from Albany pointed out the books 10 HIM; Mr.
Lambert Was present and he made proposition to ex-
anime the Supcrintcndent's head (iaughter)-thc
Super,ntcndcnt, Mr. Snyth, on leaving said "You
had better, Doctor, put pair Of cail'phers on the
cash box"
Mr Rollins inquired what calliphcrs were and wit
ness, making a movement Of his hands around HIS
head indicated tnat they were sortsoi arrange
ment for making chronological examination oi the
human cranlum. The explanation oil tho witness' ev,-
deDce Is that Dr. Lambert, who H u member OF the
Lbera CLUB and greatly given 10 issues and ologics,
biology and phrcnology more especially, could
sist inc temptation TO propose an analysis OF super
intendent smyth's various bumps whom he
camc 10 talk TO him upon The condition Of
the company OF which ne was president
The witness continued: AT tho third interview
Doctor SAID, There may be impairment here"
anu said, "1f there b. an impairment why did you
mako TINS disbursement of $40 000Y" he repned
there some details about that that he would
havo TO look over; l told MIN that thcro was very
Ittlo cash about the checks he showed OF his
and OF DR.. Morris; that Mr. REID told me they wcre
gwen for salary; cannot remember what answer he
gave: the checks were drawn trust company
every month Tor DIR. Lambert and Dr. Morris OF Sl2j
each for tour years. those checks amounted TO a0out
$l3 900 There some iurlncr exam nation OF the
witness, ciciting nothing OF any consequence, and
then the Court adjourned III tnis morning at eleven
o'clock.
STRUGGLING TO SAVE CASE.