Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1884-05-28
QUARTER SESSIONS.
AuJoUsrsU TENN or MA, uvxr
'hai OF ssmusi Hecier tor Emb.s st,smeut-
Toe ssss-w ssson Usss Attached.

'fa' OF Samuel Kseicr tor Smb-siismeut-
Toe esss- vs. asson Usss Attached.
The smith Cases Continued.
., tuesday Afternoon. tn w. Samuel
keeler, OF Lancaster, embezz,emsnt, After
the Jury had been sworn IN tho case, the
defendants counsel asked to quash the
Indictment Tor the reason that under the
law Vt Ia necessary In order to convict a
person OF this charge that no should DO
carryip ON business ~ an agent and that
tho indictment failed to set that forth
that tho indictment did not sufficiently
charge tho defendant with any offence
known to tho law aud that the defendant
was acquitted Of the offence at the April
court. The court refused To order the
indictment quashcd for the present.
In the case IL was charged by tho oom.
monwealth that the defendant acted as
agent, in this city, of tho Central
Manufacturing Company, of Lewisburg,
| Pa, under an agreement dated January 10,
1882, for tho sale Of rcapcrs, mowers 30,
In pursuance Of this contract the COM
pany shipped to MIR. keeler roayers and
mowers to the value Of s2,07l.5i. OF tho
goods the defendant sold hvc reapers and
eight mowers, all OF which were valued at
sS5I.iO OF this amount he gave tho oom.
papy $500, leaving a balance duo the
company Of s531.4O; although ho was
called upon several times by the agent Of
tho company for the balance, he did not
pay 1t over. Several witnesses were called
To prove these facts. At the conclusion
the commonwe witnesses counsel for
the defense argurod that MIR. Keeler was
indicted for embe2zloment as an agent
with power to sell, and there was no such
crime, aud they asked for verdict.
Ibe commonwealth argued that they
had boen asked to olect under which count
in tho indictment they sought for n con.
viction, and they did 80 under the impress
sion, however, that they were not com.
peled to do 30 until they had presented
all of their evidence. They accordingly
asked leave to modify their election at
this point and have the case go on under
the count which charges embc zzlement as
|, consignee. The court allowed the case to
proceed on the latter count.
The evidence for the defense showed
. that In the year 1882 this reaper company
; were very anxious to introduce their
machines in this county, aud Mr.. Keeler
i, who was dealer in agricultural imple-
: ments, was asked to accept the agency.
Keeler agreed to try to sell the machines.
After time the defendant found that 1t
would COST great deal OF money to put
: them in the market, and told the agents
Of the company that it would be impossi
; bic for him to return as much money as
they expected. Mr.. Lepply, the agent,
then told him to use some Of the money
to sell the machines. This was done aud
defendant never appropriated any Of tho
money to his own use, nor did he intend
to defraud the reaper company out Of any
money. On trial.
= Wednesday, Morning. This morning
Winfield and George Smith, charged with
murder, were brought into court Ga
n motion Of the counsel for defense the case
= was continued to August on account oi
/ the absence of au important witness for
. the accused.
A In the case Of Samuel Keelor, charged
4 with embezzlemeDt, the defense called a
!, number Of witnesses who testified to the
n good character OF the defendant prev iou,
Q to this charge. Jury out.
= The case Of Edward Getz, Of York, who
is charged with robbng DR.. Wasson aud
j. B. Lebkicker of money and watches al
0 Lebkicker's house in this city last August
0 was attached just before ADJOURNMENT az
, noon, but no evidence was heard.