Ceredo advance. [volume] (Ceredo, W. Va.) 1885-1939, 1885-11-05
CERhDO WAYNE co. W. VA. A.THURsDAY. NOVEMBER s. 1885
FOUND GUILTY.
\ sentence to the rcnitcntiary for T.n
Years tor crand Larceny Iikcly.

\ sentence to the rcnitcntiary for T.n
Years tor Grand Larceny Likely.
NEW York. October 9S-The trial Of
Ferdinand Ward was continued to-day.
George J. Chambers. stcnographcr In the
case OF Holt against Warner, aud George
+. Spencer, cashier OF the firm OF Grant q
Ward, were examined briefly. bat their
testimony developed nothing new. The
prosecution then rested. EN-Judge Coch.
ran opened Tor the defense. He said that
his client had been houtded bv the press.
10y financial men aud by members OF
prominent family, but the jury had
only TO consider the evidence and
render verdict accordingly. Fish was
convict, aud his condition when sworn
as witness prevented his being
liable Tor perjury or anything less than
murder Fish comes animated by venom
ana sWears 10 anything that comes into
his head. Fish's testimony could not bs,
considered without corroborntive testi.
mony. Upon the evidence n verdict of
guilty was impossible. William y. War.
nsr, for the defense, testified that he knew
Ward aud recognized the check for
SIl.sO which he had received in the or.
diuary course of business. After certifica-
ton by the Marine Bank IL was depos-
tied in the American Exchange Bank
On cross-eN miuation Warner said that
n
vatc office. The amount was tho pront on
certain Investments with Grant a Ward on
Government contracts. Tne differences
due on the investments resulted IN his get
ting the check for ~ $40. All tie contracts
were made direct with Ward iu his privato
Office. On MAY he received "a contract fot
"A much larger sum than s1t 500 which only
represented the profit on the old trnnsnc-
ton. Mr.. Warner did not know where the
contracts were, but thought that possibly
he had some i'm his possession. Julien
i. Davies. the receiver for the
hrm OF Grant q Ward, testified that he
took possession of the assets Of Grant &
Ward on Nav =, 1884. Ia one packnce
whore ~ bonds should have been. Ial were
found 70 be missing. VIM. &. Smith tcsti-
hCd that between May 3 aud NAV he had
been negotiating loans FOR the firm of
Grant " ward, but did MT know what be-
came Of the money realized. This witness
virtually closed the case for the defense
General Tracy for tho defense, offered 20
allow the jury 90 test whether or not one
could use the telephone and another stand
ing 10y him could distinguish voices Con.
crol Tracy summed mp the evidence for the
defense, laving particular sress upon the
TACT thot FISH, as n convict, was not amen
able 10 any penalty for perjury, and hold
ing that ne was urged on 10y yindictivo
hatred OF the accused. Colonel Fellows
summed M for the 81 te. contrasting the
actions Of Ward and Fish at tho time 81 tIe
failure. The former ran away. the Inter
aWnlteu the catastrophe like a man. Judge
B'rreit began his charge az $3.50. lie de-
hnod the law and read the statute cover
ing the crime charged. The question
was as TO whether tho defendant had an
intent 10 defraud, and OF such character
ns To deceive n person Of ordinary pru-
dence. Had Ward procured the S1i 500
In such wayy The whole case rested on
one point: Did Ward obtain the certifca-
ton OF tho 81 $50 checky II was for the
iHry TO decide on the evidence Of jas. ID.
fish and his brother, tho testimony OF
neither being contrndiCted. Ward was not
alone on trial. but Justice, too, was ON
trial. Public clamor should not influence
the jury, and. last Of all, money should
not Interfere with The verdict. The Jury
retired az 1:25. Az iD:ij the jury entered
The court room aud the Testimony of John
n. Carr, the receiving teller Of the Marine
bank. was read. II covered the transac-
lions In regard 10 tine checks upon which
the indictment was found. The iurv then
again retired. Al -: g. the jury returned
10 court aud rendered verdict OF larceny
IN thc hrst degree, penalty ten years, with
IN discretion OF the court