Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-09-27

als Case to Como Up st the November
Torn of Court.


The hearing in the case OF the United
States against ). II. Pullen was taken up
for the third Time yesterday morning.
The defendant was charged with forging
receipt to a postal money order and
rraudulently collecting ST. 70 on the
order.
Gauiel O'Counor, in whose employ the
accused has been for some years as a
bookkeener and collector, was first put on
the stand he stated that about May 81
he instructed Puilen TO send money
order 10 G.. ID. Frank, Charleston.
After waiting some time he received
BIN from Frank, and upon inquiry
I being made 10 was learned mat
money order had been issued
rs the savannah post Office payable 10
! Frank at Charleston. The money order,
however, had never been presented az
/ Charleston, but the books in the govern
ment office showed that 10 had been paid
/ here. Mr.. O'COnnor was shown the sig
nature, ID. O'Counor.' nn the order, aud
al once pronounced It a forgery.
Beng asked il he thought the signature
/ was written by the defendant, the witness
| SAID that In HIS opinion IL was.
! j. Il. Saussy, Esq, counsel for the ac.
! cused, objected to Mr.. O'Conn0r's opin-
I ion in regard TO the signature as the de-
/ PENDANT had admitted that no was not an
expert in judging different persons
/ writing.
The witness stated that the defendant
/ had always before attended 70 his book
/ and collections all right.
Mr.. O'COnnor explained the bringing OF
{ the matter to the attention OF the postal
I authorities and his interviews with Post
I master Wilson. III stated that the Post
master remarked that the letter of advice
containing the order which Pullen
claimed to have dropped into the letter
box might have blown back and been
picked up by some one. The witness re-
membered that Money order clerk War
ing stated at first that he could not re-
member to whom he had paid the order
but afterward said to Pullen, Il paid II
TO you"
Mr. Waring, who was examined at the
first hearing, was subjected TO orOss-eX-
animation by the defense. He testified
that Pullen came to him and told him that
the letter WAS lost, and stated that az
could not remember anything about a
young man coming up behind him, but
remembered calling Pullen's attention to
the fact that the order had been repaid.
In reply to questions by the defense the
witness stated that it was possible for
person inside the Office 70 put an order in
the money order clerks drawer, and that
such thing had been done.
The defense asked the witness If. in
case the accused showed that he was out
of the city on May %, If he the witness
would admit that he was mistaken about
paying the order to Pullen on that day.
The witness replied thas it was possible
in such a case for him to be mistaken.
Mr.. r. ID. MunfOrd, paying teller of the
Southern Bank, was put on the stand as
an expert. He stated that the signatures
on the application and the receipt were
very much alike, and in his opinion, ifn0t
written by the same person, one was
initiated from the other. The witness
was shown three other signatures, sd.
O'COnn0r per j. II. Pullen," and thought
that the three, and the signature ID.
OCOnn0r' on the receipt, were all writ
ten by the same party.
j. II. Pullen, the defendant, was sworn
and said that he did not sign the name
sd. O'OonnOr" on the money order. He
said that be dropped the letter of advice
containing the order in the letter box
under the stamp window in the post office.
He declared that he did not collect the
money and did not know that the order
could be repaid. he added that he asked
Mr.. Warning what should he done when 1t
was discovered that Frank had not re-
ceived the order. 81 was
told" the defendant continued.
"that l would have to get duplicate Or
der. Waring wrote out the application
and l signed it, and when he was writing
out the money order q young man behind
him came up and touched him aud said it
had been repaid. Mr.. WarinS was sur
prised and so was l. Mr.. Warning spoke
to Mr.. Wilson and called his attention to
it. and said that MIR. Hun had paid it
while he Waring) was at dinner"
Mr.. Hull said he had not paid it, for he
did not know IL could be done. Mr.. War
ing then said that If Mr.. Hull had not paid
iii WAS utterly impossible for him War
ing to remember TO wnOm he paid 1t.
The matter stopped there, and Mr.. VIII
son said he would send for the order
to Washington. 1t was about ten
days afterward that Mr.. Waring
said that in studying the matter over he
recollected he had paid II TO me. AT that
time he asked me il had not signed Mr..
OCOnnor's name to an order prior to
that. | told him l had not. was the
first one VINE called the attention OF the
Post Office Department to the loss OF the
order. | also called the attention Of the
Postal Inspector to 1t by the letter intro
duced in evidence. Mr.. Wilson promised
TO send an inspector TO see Mr.. O'COnnOr
and me, but none ever came"
The defendant added that his cOnnec-
ton with the order ended when he mailed
the letter which contained it.
On cross examination the defendant
said that he went out into the country
near Jasper Spring on May %. the day the
order was paid. He left the CITY early in
the morning and did not return until II
O'Clock, and until p. m. on the same day
he was in company with Mr.. Watts and
visited RObertsville with him.
After returning from KObertsville the
defendant stated that he was busy at Mr..
O'COnnOr's office and was not In the post
Office that dSy. In the argument FOR
the defense counsel advanced the
theory of some one in the post office forg-
ing the name TO the order, as was done in
another case shortly before. This was
supplemented by the plea of an allbi.
United States Commissioner Erwin, in
giving his decision, said he thought that
there was sufficient evidence TO warrant
him In holding the accused for court.
Bond was fixed at 500, which WAS given,
aud the defendant was released.