Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-11-08
TF!E TRIAL OF RIGEI0W.
The Government Closes EtS Case and
the Defense NnenS.

the Defense Opens.
This morning. in the Criminal Court. Judge
"yiie, the trial OF the case OF r. r. Biceiow late
receiving teller OF the National Bank OF the Re
pubic. for embeZzicment. WAS resumed Mr. JF
cam individual boo&keeper) resumed the stand
Tor redirect examination Witness Transcribed In the
blotter the notes paid to Mr.. Bigeow from his B')
book The notes We're numbered and the numbers
are on book
by the court-The blotter shows whether the
credit Is from a note paid or deposit.
witness took the book OF F. X Ward and ex-
planned the eraSurr OF June a6th by stating that he
had found an item entered twice After the books
i iid been called in he found an entry on the pass
slip for it Mr. Bradley furnished one ON which ii is
stated withheld 10y b. +. Rigelow."
The court rulei this paper out.
MI. +. L. Baldwin testified that he was now nav
ing teller. ana formerly held the position of fndi-
NiQuai bookkeeRer in the bank. His duties. among
otner; We're the reception of monei and city Checks
from the receiving teller and making out state
ments The receiving teller handed 10 him the
money and the city checks which witness counted.
Witness examined his statements and found that
BlgeioW handed 10 him May 10. 1882 $50 i66 IL. May
S,h. -; Nav Sth. 17.69lSI; NAY 9Th s2 I56 81:
ssI MtE on StlSs. Nay 4th, s36 2.si IS: May 81,
SS>.lnui: NAY 2d Sc COO: May ISt 500 IA 81: Aprfl
29th, slS,TS1S. Cfhe object Of this testimony was
TO show that Rigelow turned over daily large sums
OF money! On June 2lSt there was turned over
sli.i6Ss 50 On the 2lst OF June witness noticed
mat BiGeow was much agitated and seemed
trlgntened. Witness knew OF the discovery made
1
Mt Gains ledger that day he noticed that Bire-
low endeavored To look at the book-he could have
on from the deSh and Bigelow subsequently asked
MI Cain what account he Mr.. Bradley was look
lhG G at and ne replied Mr.. J; T; stevens:
Witness identified several deposit Sins as in Mr.
BgeioW hand writing. These included the slips
or Walter, Spicer, Compton & Co. and others. The
sup OF MT Ward. the original date Of which is May
29th Is In the handwriting OF Mr.. Wards cashier.
ana the alteration 10 June 10Th i'm Mr.. Bigclow'S
hIandWrltlng Witness preceded Mr. Cain as book
Keeper and looking at the journal under December
2ln ISL he read deposit OF 81 800 by Ernest Rup-
pert which he also found In the ledger and he read
Ganer entries In the books The entries in the
journal were made from deposit slips
oSS-eXanined:-WitneSS had no personal knowl-
edse OF the correctness Of the deposit slips. Re
ceived them from the receiving teller and some
times took them from the spindle: generally took he
Slips twice during the day. Mr.. Bigelow had two
Spndles. one OF which was in the counter. in reach
stevens checks and said they passed through Seye-
RAJ hands, and they entitled him 10 that much
credit. Witness watched Bigeow that day be-
cause ne was suspicious attributed BgelowS
chalSe OF color TO a consciousness OF guilt. Wit
ness mes was quite sure that the alteration on the
Ward slip was In Bigelow'S handwriting Witness
did not remember That he ever received a deposit
while Bigelow was there
- ke,direct-Witness proved the account OF Mr.
Mr.: Reigart testified that he was an Individual
Oookkeener: he testified as to the accounts Of w
Il, Is, DO downing q Bro, bearing aud johnson and
otherS-hlS testimony being OF the saline character
as that OF Mr.. Cain.
Ch;iS. Walter testified. Identifying his pass book,
ana turning to June 2lSt, 1882 he found entry OF a
deposit OF $50
TEsTI-JNY OF PRIVATE DETECTIVE FLISDER
CharleS r. Finder testified that he was a private
detective that in January. 1882, his attention was
called to Mr.. Bigelow by Mr.. II. X Elliot who sent
Tor him. Witness, in pursuance of an understand
ing issued q thousand circulars with Photographs
Offering 81 900 reward; he received information that
Bisseow was at Port Sarnia. Canada: went there
and saw him: found that he was registered as d. p
he was arrested Witness went over TO Port Sarnia
ana at the request OF Bigelow paid board bill at
tne Bell Chamber house for eleven DAYS board at
Sl-D, and brought over BigelowS luggage Mr..
McDeF1it was there, and asked Mr. Bigelow if he
would return without the forluaty of D,ners and
ne replied that he would.
Cross -eNamined.-Big came over under the
S,fs ss ana Srlpes He was delivered TO them wit
Iuft huron house at Port Huron.
TESTIMONY OF Ex-DErEcTIvE ACDEv1TT.
MI. James A McDevitt testified that he saw Big
Glow On the 2Sth of July at Port Huron at the Port
Huron house. He said that he had LETT Washington
city on the $40 train June 21st
CrOSS-eXamined.-B-e -eiow was willing to come
Dack without waiting.
TESTIMONY FOR THE GOVERNMENT CLOSED.
Papers were offered and admitted in evidence
showing the corporate existence OF the bank.
IhlS closed the governments case.
THE LAW.
Mr.. Cook asked unGer which OF the several laws
vction.
MI. Taggart replied that the law was found i'm
richardson's s supplement. 2d section, act February
4tl, 1873. imposing penalty not exceeding 5000
lile ana imprisonment not exceeding five years
one or both, in the discretion Of the court
MR. COOKS OPENING REMARKS
Mr. Cook opened the case to the jury at noon.
He said the charge was the taking of sals9 I'm
money-not notes, checks, Or deposit slips The in
dictment was so vague that the court required
II,l fllatf
OF the checks would not sustain the charge. They
would show that Bigelow never miSappropri-
ated one dollar OF the banks money: the
errors would be explained The deposit slips could
have been removed. He would show that the irreg-
uaritieS were not those OF Mr. Bi~elow: that there
was no crime in his action: that the deposit tickets
Which fell from his coat were not placed there by
him. and that believing that the threat to get even
With him was about being carried into effect. he fled
UptO this time there had been stain upon his life
and after hearing the testimony they We're TO de-
eide whether he was guilty or otherwise After
this Testimony he would ask the court to decide
that there could be no conviction, because the iu-
dictlnent Is too vague and general, DC.