Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1881-12-19
GUARDING THE MAILS.
The Expense and Delay AtseDdan
on the Trial OF an Embezzler.


The Expense and Delay Attendant
on the Trial OF an Embezzler.
The recent trial AMI conviction Of James
A. Long in the United States District Court
for robbiDg the mails have, on account Of
the PECULIAR circumstances attending the
case in its progress through the courts, ex-
cited more than ordinary interest, ard we
have learned from an official source the fol-
lowing facts in addition to the brief notice
that has already appeared: At the time the
crime was committed, and for which he was
convicted, Long was mail route messenger
on the railroad from Macon to Camak, and
was arrested July 18th, 1878.
Previous to his capture numerous depre-
dstiOns had been committed, ard at that
time Il seemed as though nothing of value
could be sent in the mails over that route
without being robbed or tempered with. So
thick and fast did these complaints come to
the department at Washington that post
office detective was sent out to investigate
the Irregularities. The agent of the Post
Office Department soon traced the losses to
Msil Route Messenger Long, who was sue
cessfully trapped.
The evidence against the defendant was,
1t is stated, conclusive. An indictment was
found against Long in November, 1873, and
as his counsel was not willing 10 go to trial
the case was continued.
Ire case In question was again continued
at the April and November terms of 1879,
without the slightest objection being inter
posed by Mr.. H. P. Farrow, then United
States Attorney. The case was again called
up in April, 1880, when the Indictment
drawn by Mr.. Farrow, was quashed by
reason Of misjoinder of counts and other
defective pleading. The Circuit Judge. in
passing upon this question, said, so we are
Informed, that so far as could be seen tie
various counts were only connected by
mucilsge, and that there was DO evidence
to show that but one count OF it had ever
been before the grand jury.
In November, 1880, and April, 1881, the
case was again continued at the request of
defendants counsel, who asked for a ''full
bench" which was granted by the District
Judge, who permitted these cOntinuances
until the present term Of the United States
Court.
Notwithstanding all these aggravatirg
and expensive delays, when the case was
called for trial and Judge Pardee directed
that il proceed "full bench" was here, but
the District Judge did not preside, and,
furthermore, the government, it is asserted,
has at every term for two years been ready
for trial, and In addition 10 the expenses of
witnesses for the United States, amounting
IN the aggregate to several thousand dol
lsrs, witnesses were allowed by the court
for the defendant at the expense of the
government. One Of the government wit
nesses repeatedly came all the vay from
Boston, Mass, two from g. Louis, some
from Atlanta, Macon, Sparta and Augusta,
Ga, making in all, including those for the
United States and the defendant, twenty
one witnesses.
When the case was finally called for trial
the witnesses for the defendant (summoned
at the expense of the United States) did not
appear, and were, on motion of the United
StStes Attorney, attached and brought into
court by the Marshal, thus causing further
delay Of five days, meantime the government
being ready and its witnesses in attendance.
There were two indictments against the
defendant, upon only one OF which he was
ried and convicted on the 10Th instant.
For the other, and much the more serious
he was charged with embezzling letter ad-
dressed to a mercantile firm In Boston,
Mass, and this letter contained bill of ex-
change for one hundred and thirty
eight dollars and q receipt for
the payment OF debt of nine dollars.
This indic 'ment was drawn under section
5467 OF the Revised Statutes, edition Of
1873, and the only law upon which 1t could
be charged. BY some strange oversight In
compiling from the act of Congress, the
words "every such person shall, on convic
ton thereof, for every such OAeuse,r were
omitted from the section referred TO in the
Revised Statutes. Demurrer was filed to
the bill of indictment on the ground that
omi ssiOn is fatal to the whole section and
that 1t is emasculated Of its entire legal
force aud effect unless It be alleged that, in
addition to the embezzlement of the letter,
its contents were taken and stolen,
This could not be done, because while the
letter was embezzled, forwarded, enclosed
in another envelope with the address writ
ten upon It IN James 4. Longs handwriting
to Augusta, Ga, from which place it was
sent to the Dead Letter Office and returned
to the writer, the bill Of exchange and re-
ceipt were not stolen. The bill Of exchange
was not negotiable.
The court held that the demurrer must
be sustained because the bill of indictment
did not charge the defendant with taking
and stealing the contents of the letter,
and further held that the fault was not in
the pleading but in the law itself, and that
owing to the singular compilation of the
section referred to it would perhaps be i'm
possible to frame an indictment which, uu-
Ger the facts of the case, could stand on the
law, or on which conviction could be sus-
tanned.
To demonstrate the curious atmosphere
in which this case has dragged its weary
way through seven successive terms of the
court, it was the current gossip as late as
the week next preceding the trial that the
case would rot be tried.
So common had this become that the
"LoDg case" was rapidly being made the
butt of ridicule throughout the State. and
we are Informed that the sppreheDsions
of the Pest Office Department were excited,
and the conc usion seems to have been
reached By that important branch of the
public service that Long, who had been in
trusted with the mails of the United
States, and who had betrayed
his trust, would be permitted at
least to go unwhipped Of justice,
and that the example so necessary to the
public interests would not in this case be
made. Bot with the steady purpose of the
present United States Attorney and his as.
sistsnt, who wrote the bill of Indictment,
prepared the case, conducted the trial, the
result, demanded by the law and the facts
of the case, was finally reached, after all
these vexstious delays