National Republican., 1883-11-09
THE COURTS.
Close Of the Prosecution in the BigelOw En-
bezzlement Case,
The Defendant Tcstifcs and Denies Any
MisHppropriation-Thc Record.
B1GELow AS A WITNESS.

X,
notes paid from the book by Mr.. Bigelow A
paper containing entries was ruled out by the
court. L. l.. Baldwin, paying teller at the
bank, testified that ho was formerly book
keeper and his duties were to receive notes
and money from the paying teller and make
statements. Witness examined his state
ments and named sums that Bigelow had
handed him to show that Bigelow turned
over large sums daily. On June 2l witness
noticed that Bigelow was much excited and
seemed frightened. When Mr.. Bradley was
looking at Mr.. Gains ledger that day he
noticed that Bigelow endeavored to look at
the book-he could have seen the heading OF
the page. Mr.. Bradley went of from the
desk and Blgelow subsequently asked MIR.
Cam what account he (Mr. Bradley was
looking at, and he replied Mr.. j. t. Stevens's.
Witness identified several deposit slips in
Mr.. Bigelow's handwriting. These included
the slips of Walter Spicer, Compton q Co.,
and others. The slip of Mr.. Ward, the orig
inal date of which is May 30, is in the hand
writing of Mr.. Wards cashier, and the alter
alton to June 10 in Mr.. Bigelow's handwrit-
ing Witness preceded Mr. Cain as book
keeper, and looking Mt the journal under Dec.
~, 1881, he read a deposit of II 500 by Ernest
Ruppert, which he also found in the ledger,
and he read other entries in the books. The
entries in the journal were made from deposit
slips
Upon cross-examination witness stated that
he had no personal knowledge of the correct
ness of tho slips. The Stevens checks passed
through a number of hands. Witness was
sure that the alteration in Wards check was
in Bigelows handwriting. Mr.. Reigart, also
bookkeeper, testified as to the accounts of w.
B. Downing s. Bro, Dearing 81 Johnson, and
others. Charles Walter identified his pass
book, and found an entry on June 2l of de-
posit of $50.
1, Ha1 IN
be employed to find Bigelow. He issued some
circulars offering $1,000 reward; heard that
Bigelow was at Port LORNA, Canada, aud saw
him there saw him later at Port Huron,
Mich, where was arrested. Mr.. McDevitt
was there, and asked Bigelow if he would re-
turn without the formality of process Bige-
low said that he would. Mr.. McDevitt cor
roborated the testimony of Mr.. flinder
Papers showing the corporate existence OF the
bank were offered anu admitted. This closed
the governments case.
Mr. Taggcrt stated the law on the subject
that the government would ask conviction
to be found in Richardson's supplement, Sec
ond section, act of Feb 4, 1875 imposing a
penalty not exceeding $1,000 fine and i'm
prisonmcnt not exceeding five years or both.
MIR. Cook opened the case for the defense.
He said the charge was the taking of So lS9
in money--not notes. checks, or deposit slips
The indictment was SO vague that the court
required bill of particulars. He claimed
that the reception OF the checks would not
sustain the charge. They would show that
Bigelow never misapproprated one dollar of
the banks money. The errors would be eX-
planned. The deposit slips could have been re-
moved. He would show that the Irregularities
were not those of Mr.. Bigelow; 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
.,,tn nHn h.,H Hal 70
had been no stain upon his life, and after
---~hesrring the testimony they were to decide
whether he was guilty or otherwise. After
this testimony he would ask the court to
decide that there could be no conviction,
because the indictment is too vague and gen.
eral, sc.
After recess, +. II. Stickney, r. w. Fem
wick, John II. Olcott A. G. Richards, w. G
Rrock, Il. G. Fox, and r. o. Hoffman testi-'
fed to Bgelow's good reputation. Thomas
S. Burr, the brother-in-law of Mr. Bigelow,
testified that the latter's health was bad, and
run down in the early part of 1882. Mr..
Bigelow left the city in June, 1882, and was
gone month. Bigelow then took the
stand.
Question by Mr. Cook. "You are charged
with embezzlement, &C. What have you to
say in relation to that charger
Mr. Bigclow. 81 deny that ever embez-
zled that amount, or any of the money, OF
ever aided another to embe2zle it,"
Taking the pass book of Mr.. Stevens, the
witness proposed to explain that the entries
of April 20 and May 10 are in his handwrit
ing In making deposit the tickets are
placed in the spindle, and at the leisure of tht
teller they arc taken Off and divided. Or
April 80 the credit of 5000 appears, and thC
testimony corresponds. When the 81, 1S9 wa
deposited the other ticket with deposit disap
peared, he knew not by what means. Wit
ness said he had frequently been ont, ant
hn.. l. find 20
memorandum, and he would make out thu
slip. When tho slips were entered he never
saw them again. Witness took up the ac-
count of Z. Rupert, and said all the items il
his handwriting he had received, and 1t
claimed that what he had done in referenc
thereto was perfectly legitimate and regular
Witness never retained cent that Mr.. Rup
pert deposited; he always placed the none.
in the drawer The witness explained mat
ters relating to other accounts, and dene'
having altered the slip of +. X. Ward. ii
denied having put the stamp on the note o
Mr.. Bond. The deposit slips, he said, coult
have been removed from the spindle b.
others. Ho had no books to compare then
with
The witness said that Mr.. Bradley's feel
ings towards him were lukewarn on aC
count Of q communication made by witnes
to the president. One morning he found n
armful Of deposit tickets OH his desk. III
said he left because of the condition of hi
health because he had lost money of his owl
and friends in mining stocks, and because @
the feeling he knew Mr.. Bradley entertainer
for him. Tho witness said he had investe
$4,000 for himself which ox-Gov. Shepherd
interested. He gave an account of his tri
west and said when at Toledo he saw he wa
advertised as an jibsconder, ho wrote to Ma
Brock, and asked him to send McDevitt 70
him.
The witness denied any knowledge of tn
deposit slips, which it is alleged dropped fror
his coat. lie was on the stand when til
court adjourned
THE RECORD.
Court IN General TERM Chief Justice Cartier an
Justices James and COr.-Reid VS.. Hannah; rule
May, 1881, vacated, and deft, ord TO exc. release
compll. Merger VS.. Hagan ct al; arg. begun;
Criminal COurt-JudGe WMie.-Benjamtn h. Bg'
low. embezzement, on trial.
Circuit Cotrt-Jilolge MdcArthlr.--Fagan VS., Co
culan: on hearing. Brown VS.. Barlow; judgt.
con. King & Powell; delft aud inquisilion or
Ross vs. Goddert; judgt. by deht.
Equity COurt-Judge Hdgner --Ricker vs. Gomez
app Tor rsIg. ord. oyerrld. Vincent VS.. Nincen
decree mod. rs TO chill. Robinson VS.. johnson
time 10 proof exten. thirty days, Herald vs. Bel
aliZ; sale rat. and complt. app com. to conVe
Birch VS.. Campbell Telf. grn. and leave TO anne
NEW SUITS.
No, s.77G Mary T. Smith VS.. Julia Shelton ct q
for the conveyance. Richards Wall, solicitor
COURT CALL,
General Term--JuStfces Cartier James and Cor,
Nos. 80, 81, %, "a, 30, 80, and S7
q