The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1882-12-23
Trial of John Il. DenisOn for Con spin.
acy with Samuel ID. Miller to
Defraud.

uelS, on the occasion tnat Inanuet uenlet
having signed the note to Miller, Denison dit
not say any thing about going to see the othe
men, Schaeffer, Yost, Gettier and Peterman
Of these gentlemen Gettier lives nearest tt
Phanuel, between his house and Manchester
Going to Manchester we passed within quar-
ter of mile of Gettier's and within the sam'
distance of Schaeffer's, in sight of the houses
of each of them. Peterman's was mile
away. Mr.. Denison did not say anything
about going to see if Gettier or Schaeffer hat
signed the notes. Going home from Man
chester we went by a different road, passing
within half mile of Schaeffer's and mile OF
Gettier's. Denison did not say anything about
going to see Schaeffer in regard to the notes
| don't know whether | saw the notes tina
evening or since that time. l remember that
l saw them, but can't recollect when or where
Denison showed them to me. cam remem,
Der whose they were except Phanuefs.
might have seen the others but don remem,
Der. Denison told me that Peterman did MOI
write his own name, that there was marx.
He said that Miller might have got that note
on him vet, only Peterman did not write ms
name. Deuison after that said that he would
not have bought the notes of Miller, II had
not brought him to Westminster. was IN
Westminster shortly before this term OF Court
commenced and saw Phanuel Wentz, Peter
Gettier, Philip j. Yost, Reuben Schaetfer and
Ferdinand Peterman. | was not authorized
by John E. Denison to say to these gentlemen
or either of them that he knew that the notes
were forgeries and that he could not recover
on them and that if they would wait little
while until he could see his lawyer that he
would deliver up the notes to them II his law
yer would agree, nor anything of the kind. l
had no talk that day or any other time with
Denison on the subject of the notes being for
geries and his giving them up.
Mr.. Maulsby then asked the witness Did
you or not after the Monday after the Saturday
when you and Denison were at Phanuel Wentz
90 with Denison to Hanover for the purpose
of disposing of Phanuel VENTS note? p
To this question the traverser objected,
Mr.. Manlsby explained I've will tolloT
this proof by great variety of other proof
going to show the guilty intent to cheat and
defraud. We propose to follow up this with
proof that Denison was informed by Gettier
and the others that all these notes were forg..
cries. We propose to follow that with proof
that he did. after this information, take the
same notes to Hanover and endeavor to sell
or exchange them"
The Court sustained the objection but init
mated that such question might be asked as
to Yost's note.
The State then offered to prove by the wit
ness that after the traverser had been inform
ed by Philip J. Yost and by other persons
that the alleged single bill of said 4ost was
forgery. the traverser stated to the witness
that he intended and was about to make an
effort to dispose of said single bill and to as
sign or transfer it to other persons for value:
and that he did an act, to-wit, left witness
house in Carroll county for the express pur-
pose of so doing"
To this offer traverser objected. The Court
overruled the objection and the traverser re-
served an exception to the ruling OF the Court.
The witness then resumed his testimony
and said "Denison did not say anything to
me about trying to pass off the 4ost note.
He and did 60 to Hanover together. He
said that he intended to exchange notes In
Hanover for property, but told me at the
same time that he did not intend to dispose
of them for full value. He never said that he
would dispose of them as genuine notes, but
said he would not do that; that he would tell
whoever he offered them to all about them
and if they would take them well and good,
that he would dispose of them for whatever
they would bring. This was a good long time
after we we were at Phanuel's, over month.
He was speaking of the notes he got from
Miller. | of course knew he got note on
Yost from Miller. He did not mention Yost' S
note | understood that he meant the notes,
for which he had given Miller $4,000. He
did not say so but | thought he meant that. D."
The State then closed its examination of the
witness and the cross examination commenced.
Witness then repeated the circumstances I'M
der which he and Miller came to Westmin-
ster and said ~ am a director of the Bach
mans Valley Railroad, and Mr.. Boyer is the
President | attended to Mr.. Boyer's bust
ness in the neighborhood. l look after his
farm, pay his taxes and let him know if any
thing goes wrong. Boyer is superintendent
of the ore banks and owns the ore bank farm,
about quarter of mile from my house. 1t
was contemplated extending the railroad to
Westminster. The President told me last
winter and in the spring, that it would be ex
tended, and at that time it was much talked
Of A charter was obtained from the last
legislature for that purpose. The extension
Of the road was delayed by the death of Mr..
Moses Taylor, which occurred some time in
June. In my conversation with Denison he
read paper to show me how he would ex
plain and dispose of the notes." A paper
was shown witness and after he had identified
it as the paper read to him by Denison, Mr..
Bond read it to the Court. Witness then said
"Mr Denison told me that he would not dis
pose of the notes to anyone unless he would
explain all about them and they would sign
an agreement in writing such as that he had
read to me-
VIM. J. Young then testified :-"I live in
Hanover, Pa. | have house and lotin Han
over to sell. ]. Milton Bair processes to be a
real estate agent, and he asked me what l
would give him to bring him purchaser for
my property. He afterwards told me that he
had a customer for my property, who had
some good paper, which he wished to ex
change. In week or SO, he brought Deni-
son and introduced him as the customer he
had for my property. | asked Mr.. Denison
if he had seen the property or wished to see it,
and he said that he had passed by it. l then
asked him ifhe wished to see the inside ofitthat
day, and he said that he had not time but that
he would call the following week, that he had
some good Maryland paper that he wished to
for real estate. | then asked him
what kind of paper it was and he said good
negotiable paper against Reuben Schaeffer,
Phanuel VENT, Mr.. Gettier, Mr.. Peterman
and Mr.. Yost, parties living in Bachman's
were good parties and he said that they were,
but to satisfy myself ] should inquire and he
would call again the following week. He
asked what l wanted for the property and l
told him S., 500. He said that he thought it
was pretty high but after some talk on the
subject, he said that he would exchange me
some of the notes for the property, either give
me notes in full payment or part in notes and
pay the difference in money. He told me that
he would see me again the following Wednes-
day. This was on Thursday or Friday. He
did not return to see me. L never saw him
again until Tuesday of this week. He did not
say anything in reference to the parties,
against whom he held the notes, having de-
fences to the payment of them. He did not
show me the paper that was read here by Mr..
Bond, or any other paper. Induced by what
Denison told me | went to the neighborhood
of Melrose and made inquiry. saw Reuben
Schaeffer in wheat field and he said he did
not owe any person any such amount, that the
note held against him was fraudulent and he
would not pay cent of it. This satisfied me
and | went no further. l saw Schaeffer the
Monday following the day saw Denison."
The State offered to prove that Denison Of
fered witness Pennsylvania paper, but traver-
ser objected and the Court sustained the OBJ
lection. --.--......,-..
Cross examined, the witness said 'sNe pro-
cess, requiring me to come here and testify