Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-12-14

In the municipal court, before Judge |
Cooley, yesterday, the case of the state |
against William F. Thompson, former |
head book keeper in the employ of Mes.rs. !
Farnham d Lovejoy, heavy numbering
firm, upon the charge of embezzlement. |
j. B. Gilfllan, of the firm of Lochren,
McNair q Gilillan, City Attorney Benton,
County Attorney Hale appeared for the
state. while Aessrs Levi, Cray l. Hart con-
Quoted the defense.
The first witness who testified was James
A. Lovejoy. of the firm of Farnham &
Lovejoy. The principal point in his tssti-
mony was the fact that Thompson was in
the employ of the company as head book
keeper and that through him all tho cash
receipts had to pass in the regular trans
action of daily business. Suspecting some
thing wrong, Mr.. Thompson had been dis
charged from the Office. The books had
been examined by an expert, and grave dis
crepancies developed.
WIN. N. REID,
being sworn, testified: Am employed by
Farnham & Lovejoy for three years; until
Sept. IA as assistant book keeper; since
Oct. as head book keeper at their Office;
was employed as an assistant to the de-
PENDANT until he left Farnham g. Loveioy's
employ; Thompson laid out the work for
me: the cash was all paid direct to Thomp-
son; Crombie's books showed sales made
by him and moneys received; Crombie
passed money all to Thompson; bank
money was handed to Mr. Lovejoy with
deposit slips; have examined day books,
journal and ledger from Jan. l, 1882, to
Aug. %, 1882; entries in day book of
Crcmbie's sales generally made by me;
entries for moneys paid out or deposits,
generally by Thompson; Thomp-
son always checked ~ back
items daily from Journal he old
all posting; in the examinations find
this dropped out or not transferred from
day book to ledger; the total amount of
these entries not transferred is a9,375.55
during the year 1S82-Jan. 18th to Aug
II; each and ali these items appear Is
checked off from day-book to journal and
from journal to day book by Mr.. Thomp-
son; none of these checks made by
any one else; he did al! the
posting; all items aside from these are &C.
counted for; accounts made to balance by
| throwing those out; funds come in in reg
| ular course of business; lumber sold for
cash; have examined accounts of Thomp-
son personally; none of these items ap-
pear there; Thompson had sole charge Of
each drawer except whom away for day or
| two he loft it with Robinson; had been
book keeper for three years; by dropping
out receipts on one side, and
cash sales on the other, the accounts wsre
made to balance; if credit and debit were
ignored the cash account would balance;
when Thompson left hs assumed to turn
over tho cash on hand; dent know what
became Of shortage; defendant has
MADE ADMISSIONS
to me; relative to these accounts; he told
mo on Nov. 20, 1882, that he hai forced
| his balances from the day he eame int
! FaYnAam & Lovejoy's Office; ct the
! time Of - stating he added he had fslsif1sd
| the books but had taken nothing-simply
| forced the balances and entries, which, if
checked by IN expert, would
| SEND Elm no sTILLwATxR.
On Dec. he told me he had already ad-
mitted enough to ne that, as near as I can
remember, he had taken Gil, goo; said most
of it was in Crombie's cash; he wanted me
to check books, and no matter what !
found to say everything vas all right.
The witness was subjected to q searching
| cross-examination, in which it was evi-
IDENTITY the intention of the defendants
counsel to show that the financial trans
actions of the firm were conducted in a
very loose and irregular manner. The
counsel undertook to show that Mr.. Love
joy was in the habit of going into the
Office daily and take various sums Of money
from tho cash box, but the witness stood
firmly to the evidence given upon tho ex-
admission in chief. He had never known
Mr.. Lovejoy to open up the cash drawer
Made the examination of the books ia
which he had certified about week ago
Heard of suspicious existing regarding
something wrong with the books KEEP!
by Thompson shortly after Thompson
left Farnham & Lovejoy's employ. He
ascertained the fact by being asked if h
could find time to check the books. Was
told that there was something wrong
Tho INSTRUMENTATION Of the books occur.
red the day previous to Thompson's arrest
Thompson had written him letters and
ktelsphoned him (the witness) that hs
wansd to soc him. They had frequent
1intsrviews relative to the mattsr.
| Tho counsel for the defense here intro
duosd a letter written by Thompson to
Reed, Nov. 9Th, 1882, marked exhibit
No. 2.
A copy Of letter written by witness to
defendant was also introduced and was
marked schedule 8.
The witness called frequently at the
Office of Thompson 4 Reed. At ono inter
view with the defendant, defendant wanted
to know the reason why he had been dis
fchsrgsd; witness replied that tho books
we're said to contain errors; defendant
said, 81 want you Reed, to check those
books and, no matter how they are, want
you to bring them ont squarr." Witness
said he would check them. Saw him a. ain
on following Saturday, in answer to a tsle-
phone; defendant then seemed to go wild
he said there were false
footings in the books which
if examined by an expert would send the
defendant to Saltwater; he said he had
taken nothing but had forcsd footings or
balance; defendant wanted witness to go
with him and steal the books. saying IF
you don't do it have two legs Of powder
and will
BLOW TEL OFFICE 10 HILL
if don't get the books; hs was wild and
witness was frightened; when he picked up
his mitten he found q note Of $500 In tho