The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-11-27

THE INSURANCE TRIALS.

ARGUMENT ON THE MolIoS FOR RETRIAr
OF ROBERT L. CASE.
Tho Court OF Oyer and Tcrmincr WAS crowded to its
fullest capacity yesterday to hear The argument q
motion tor a trial Robert L. Case. late Prcsi-
dent OF the Security Lilo Insurance Company, con.
vctcd OF perjury in swearing TO ase statements to
tho condition Of the company The prisoner, who
evinced much more nervousness than during his
trial. sat- by his counsel Mcssrs Winfield, Sullivan and
Fullerton, while near HIM seated his WHO and
daughters.
1t having been arranged to try next Monday Dr..
Lambert, ex-prcsident OF The Popular Life Insurance
Company, against whom similar charge has
been preferred, Tho argument the motion
Tor the rctria Of Sir. Case opened by Mr. VIM
Held Ito stated that under the statute OF 1915 thoy
asked Tor new trial ON tho ground OF newly discov
cred evidence, ana also the merits Of case. IL
had been proved by the testimony Of Wctmore, Allen
and others that the annual report of the financial
Standing Of Tho security LIE Insurance Company tho
superintendent OF Insurance was not actually sworn
To ny the defendant The document was sent to tho
Office of the notary, Mr. McCwau, who affixed his
tarIal seal TINS was coacusively proved by tho
"highy respectable colorcd portor,n rs tho DIS.
trict Attorney had called him, who sworc that tna
statement prepared by Tho officers OF the In.
stltution, was taken To the notary Tor signature
then 10 AIR. Case and his '.JuraLn affixed without
meeting tho notary anu tnen sent TO Albany. This
was careless way, but 1t WAS not unusual in tins
city aud county 20 have presidents OF Institutions
aitx signatures without swearing and this
notary had no clear recollection OF the and place
10, but tue deeDce proved u not In conciu-
SION he SAID "A sentence would haston defendants
denth aud end lie IA feou's cell Considering tho
serious nature OF tue aud the slender nature Of
the evidence Tor the prosecution the dcendant was
entitled to "a review oil the evidence trial "
Counsel thcn read number OF aiidavits containing
newly discovered evidence.
FURTHER ARGUMENT.
Mr. sullivan followed IN support OF tho motion. lie
SAID no had corvcraed with his client aud had
never him until ~ SQUIRT tnat day. Hc was con
WINGED II tc duty OF the Court to the judg
mcut Tho law OF 1898 requires each Insurance com.
pany to prepare staoiDcnt oil accounts Oath
the very thing that The defendant had not done. IL
not merely swear that "a statement made by
else 10 true, but to prepare 10 himself .'un-
der OATH and the decisions courts wero that
Tue man must DO sworn before the statement was
made instead OF appcnding an AFFIDAVIT
Assistant District Attorney Rollins closed the argu-
ment opposition to The motion. lie insisted That
trial had been LARRY conducted nd that he had
been most iarly dciendad, anu he saw why
person oil the previous high character Of the pris-
should DO treated with any lcniency, put tho
contrary urged most Btrcnuousy that when tho
GROUNDS Tor the application were wholly technical
the offence oil the accused all more glar.
Ing, and that The verdict OF tho jury Ian unusually
Intelligent oncwas most just, aud that there was
solid legal basis upon which 10 found the present APP
plIcation
Al the conclusion OF The argument Judge Davs took
tho papers, reservns MS decision.