New-York tribune., 1878-11-21
T11E Union TRUST FORGERY.
..,,,,, ov THE WITNESS STAND.

poyTrz on THE WITNESS STAND.
.n,crIoNs UNDER CROss-BXAMINATIoN
r nr>IALS OF BECHERs ENIDENCE-sUM-
',,xo Up OF MS COUNSEL.
81 of Charles w. POnteZ was con-
IN" 4"I,crday There was the usual delay caused py
e.' tnror Then Irving Ward, who Is the attorney
one 80 "a well as his personal friend opened the
80 IN the Jury Mr. Ward dweH on MS own 'Hoiousu
e - his cl,ent's innocence and the GOOD reputation
o,IV .a .vcent as il was assailed In TINS SPECIAL
VI ~" .ho evidence against the prisoner was only
On vowed forger. THROWING that out thele was
200, except that asuccessuI ioise'y nau oo' Il 0o'i,
,..d AGAINST this a long career Vi hones' "oiA
a. ,nis citv which had secured 10 foh'eL con'inueu
il 's IN position Of trust for more than one year
% ,sniciop had been directed against MN ne
a''4 .a,,r,cd to escape even when he learned that
heN'i -, snsnected for months. That was strong
rontion In his favCr. Becher tOd them 'i'' ne Ia"
ar means from this forgery TO escape yeV he e'oou me-
gound And II the prisoner was gullty' WY i"u " ioV
ressed the forgery merely for So9,ooV, pu ioi e
a., , oroount over 5000 900, which, II guilty. ne us'
have known was on deposit WIN lho On0N ]1"'' '"'
,onv when the forged check was dra"n'
I, tI,ce for the prisoner was, first, that OF the
-, n,nI,c who took the affidavit to an answer put
4, nv Recber 10 a civil suit by the insurance company
cainst him This was only that Becher testified 10 'he
answer after looking over IT, 49,
Tho spbstanal evidence for Charles W. Pontez was MS
- No testified that he was born in London, but came
% nm. country when child. He was now thirty-ohe
oars old In 1866 he was Junior clerk in the Union
NAVIGATION Company, in which Joseph Chapman was
the secretary 1862 that company having closed up
no went into the employ of the New-York Life lnsur-
once Company beginning at salary of $500, which had
been increased gradually lie had frequent occasion to
ca 70 the cashiers room, but rarely to the safe In
Isz4 his health failing, he got vacation
and went 10 Europe There he met Chapman III
London, but did not remember meeting Becher there'
He did not meet Reiley Elliott both names represent
ing the same man His first introduction to Kelley
was through Chapman, in 1872 or 1873 He STOOD up
with him II 1876 as his best in marriage but hdd
no idea that he Elliott until Mr. Beers told MN so
and showed him E.hott's photograph.
On crOss-examination the witness strangely hesated
DELAYED his answers and allowed himself to be driven
into selfcOntradctons that even Mr. Phelps seemed
TO pity him in his efforts TO escape the network when
had been gathered around him. and gave him, again and
again time 10 consider his answers In his crOss-ex-
animation POntez said:
The first intimaton had that Reiley had been ar
rested from newspaper accouOs. had seen that
Mr.. Elliott was arrested and Mr. Beers showed me
photograph. II he and Kelley, the man with whom
stood up, are the same, then l suppose knew Kelley
was arrested. l did find out that the two men
were the same / don't remember whether
learnot from Mr. Beers. first heard III 1871 ol
his arrest never went TO the TOmbs 10 inquire OF AlIn
did not know him intimately. He was friend Of my
Chapman |
with Reilcy. He married Miss Freeman. was taken
10 her residence think for the first time at his
riage spoke one day 10 lady friend Of mine on the
stoOp OF the same house. before the marriage. lad
rather not name her IL was N west lhrtN-tDirTst
was think the person who afterward married Rcley.
That was the Of her. Imade her acqudnt-
ance then-twO or three DAYS before the marriage
o-How did you come TO say to Mr.. Beers that you
went the wedding at the ladys request ana ana not
know the gentleman Al don't think said that
didn't know the gentleman Idon't think MI Beers
said s.,
Mr Phelps was right. The witness resumed: ] dd not
Mr. Beers 10 know tat wasaequainted with man
E@." EEHG '1u O'en A''S'''u '"ppO''' wv -D' a'
mai ReIliey and Elliott were onel A-Well, inferred
IL from Mr Beers showing a card and other matters
/ understood that Reley's wife was an actress, |
learned II from time spoke 10 her the stOOp
don't there was anything strange IN my hmd-
marriage was August 81 1876 knew him as Chap
mans friend. inquired Of Elliott as to C9apman'ss
in ConStantnople, think from the newspapers had
been intimate with Chapman from the time We were TO-
names were mentioned having been imprisoned at the
same ume qO neard of Reeys escape from Letter
from Mrs. Chapman. she may have called him Rel ley
o-How did you identity William Kelley with Little
Joe Z" A-That was nickname -,
Q-How did you know that; you say you never e heard
him introduced by any other name than william ReiileyI
A.-Wel the evening was introduced 10 nm M; or
Mrs. Chapman told me that they sometimes called MIN
The witness resumed When met Reiley knew that
Dos Pasos the time " Mr. Beers speaking to
me knew nothing against his character Iknew moth
Ing except what read In the newspapers believe ne
did tell be had left Chapman IN prison. didnt thinR
there was any that account IN my speaking 10
him. personally knew nothing against his character
heard "a number of names mentioned as having escaped
from Smyrna Becher may have been one OF them.
don't recall Mrs. Chapmans sending me q letter TO be
cent TO Mr.. Middleton
The Dlstrict-Attorney here questioned him somewhat
sharply regard TO hs correspondence with MIS- Chap
man ca LED in London, Mrs. Lydla Porter
The witness inclined 10 make hight OF when me
District Attorney presented eter OF his In 1876 which
Pontez acknowledged he had written A mention OF
90 W" he could not first explain, but finally he
said il must have meant George Wilkes not, however
the editor A second allusiOn TO one " e." was al.
mited by him 10 be the same person but he faltered
strangely in regard meaning Of other initials IN
his letter and denied that he intimate with Middle
ton Bell or George Wilkes. number OF ladies were
called show the general good character Of Pontez,
ana the evidence was closed
Mr. Dos Passos summed up at length on behalf OF the
prisoner claiming had been claimed before, that the
only evidence against PODez that OF the ayOWed
forger Becker that this fully met by the proof OF
good character OF the prisoner aside from the gen
era ton in favor OF the Innocence OF every per
son He anayzed at length the evidence OF the prose
cutOn and claimed weakness verdict OF acquit-
tai The DsIrct-AttOrney will sum up the case to-day.