Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1885-02-03
Testimony i'm the Case Of w. III. Demp-
sey-NO Verdict in the Drew Case.

the first witness for the government in the trial OF
W. H. Dempsey and Edwin c. Kirkwood, indicted
! Tor presenting and collecting alleged fraudulent
claims against the bureau of medicine and surgery
He produced the vouchers file in the office in the
cases OF the six alleged fraudulent claims forming
the basis OF the present indictments These were,
respectively, for the following amounts: January
30 1882, s215: September Cd isS2, sS9i January G.
1888, sl036.20; September 1St, 1883, (the Agnew
voucher, 1884: September 4, 1885, S. 1872 and octo-
Der % 1884. q. 597. 80.
The witness said on croSs-eXamination that the
first three vouchers mentioned had been passed by
the auditors, and the last three had not Yet been
passed He said on redirect examination that he
would not testify TO surgeon General Wales hand
writing. He was acquainted with two kinds Of sig
natures that came into the Office such papers.
Which was DR.. Wales and which was not he could
not tell
Francis " Walker. chief clerk OF the navy pay
Office, testified that the vouchers described
were presented at the navy pay Office by Mr.. Demp
Sey and paid to him. lie identified Sir. Dempseys
signature on the vouchers
Mr.. Worthington then stated that before Offering
these papers in evidence. in order TO avoid the usual
discussion, he would enter noile pros. TO the
first and third counts in the Indictments
MT Wilson called attention TO the fact that the
voucher OF September 1st known the Agnew
voucher, did not contain Mr.. nempSeys name
In response TO a question by Mr.. WOrthington,
the witness produced the voucher retained at the
navy pay Office containing Mr.. Dempseys sigma
ture
The witness said on cross-examnation that the
| III.
| dempsey when presented for payment.
Mr.. Williams objected 10 the admission OF the
vouchers made out In the name OF j. X Agnew, on
| the ground that the Indictment In that case did
not set out the receipt any part of the receipt,
| but only the alleged false bill.
Mr. Williams and Mr.. Wilson then argued the
point raised against the Indictments in the other
cases as to variance between the paper set forth
In the Indictment and the papers offered in proof.
IheSe objections were overruled
Mr. Wilson further examined the witness TO show
That Pay Inspector Washington, 10 whom the
/ Indictment charged the Agnew claim present
ed, was absent from the city from about August
u IN 10 the latter part OF september, 1888.
| AN OBJECTION oyERRULED
Mr. Wilson then objected to the Introduction OF
the Agnew papers, on the ground that it was ap-
parent that they could not have been presented to
Mr.. Washington.
| Judge Wylie Overruled the objection stating that
Ii was not necessary to have used MI ashington's
name, and the crime was complete when the bill
was presented to the pay Office. When a claim was
paid by the chief clerk I'm the course OF the law IL
was paid by the pay director. The vouchers and
receipts were then read to the jury by Mr.. Worth
| lngton The witness said all these accounts were
paid by check to Mr. Dempsey, except the first for
| S2l5, which was paid in cash. The two vouchers
| dated in september, 1883, Including the Agnew
voucher, were paid by one cheek for S6,0l6 10 Mr.
dempsey. The witness produced the checks and
Identified MI. Dempsey signature upon them on
| cross examination the witness said, when a
voucher In the name OF one party was presented by
another the office required the voucher TO be prop
erly recepted and then to be endorsed the party
to whom payment was made. II was a frequent oc-
| currence TO have vouchers endorsed In this way.
MEDICAL DIRECTOR WALES TESTIMONY
| Medical Director Philip s. Wales, late surgeon
general of the navy, was next called as witness
He testified at length to the manner of purchas-
| ing supplies for hospitals. He described also the
routine OF the Office in settling accounts Kirk
wood was the financial clerk, prepared the youch-
! ers and kept account or the appropriations The
witness said he had known Mr.. Dempsey five or
| SIX years, as contractor Witness said he never
heard OF J. Il. Agnew until he saw the name in
J hs
| voucher and said he did not know that he had
signed it. "If that is my genuine signature the
| witness said, sit was obtained by fraud"
Mr. Wilson objected that there was no averment
| that the signature was false.
Mr. Worthington called attention to the allega-
tion In the indictment that the account was not
| approved by the surgeon general
MI. Wilson's objection was overrued
The witness explained, as in other cases, his
theory as to how his signature might be obtained
by the trick OF inserting blank voucher or a false
voucher among the triplicate vouchers presented
him to Slgn as he looked over only the first on
top, and then signed the three, Supposlng them TO
be triplicate These vouchers ana all the cores
pondence would he brought to witness 10y Chief
Clerk about hafpast three O'Clock,
and had 10 lie signed as rapidly 1as possible
The witness looked over the vouchers and said he
had never known OF such goods being ordered He
said he had never heard OF Agnew, or OF the
"autopsical tables which were included in the
Agnew bill. No invalid beds" other goods
charged In this bill were purchased. AS TO one OF
the Dempsey bills making charge for microscopes
he said he knew such goods were not purchased OF
vi H.
from one firm in NV York.
Upon cross-eXamnation the witness said that
small articles needed for Use In the bureau were
purchased in open market. Stationery was some
times purchased In this city, Mr.. Carrigan had
charge OF the stationery The witness said that
he thought most OF the signatures attached to lie
vouchers were his genuine signatures obtained in
the manner he had described.
The witness said he had no distinct recollection OF
having directed Mr. Dempsey 10 deliver goods pur-
chased in open market TO other points than the
bureau in this city. The witness was then shown
three papsrs. and said he believed the signature
was his. Mr. Wilson then read the papers, which
were dated respectively, March g. 1888 Aug H. 1888
and March 8. 1888, ana which We're orders TO Mr.
Dempsey to deliver stationery and other goods TO
the United States receiving ship Colorado at
New York. to the naval hospital in this city and 10
the naval hospital in Brooklyn. \. Y The witness
said he had never made an examination OF the
day book or ledger or the Office, but left this en-
tirely to his supordinates. Upon REORGANIZATION
tile witness said that In purchase oil $40 or $50 or
over, bids would be invited from dealers
AT the close OF DIR. Wales examination a recess
was taken.
After the recess, Dr. Adrian Hudson. medical in
spector, who was assistant in the bureau of med-
cine and surgery under DIR. Wales testified TO the
course OF business In the bureau. He said he had
never heard or }. K Agnew until after the develop
mentS In these cases The witness said Mr. Demp-
sey had never, to his knowledge, furnished the
goods, including platform scales
Mir. Wilson said TO abbreviate the testimony he
would admit that Mr.. Dempsey did not furnish the
specified articles named In the accounts: that he
did furnish, on written acquisitions from he surgeon
general, other articles TO the same amount and
rendered bill for What he did furnish at the time
he furnished them and at the times covered by the
bills In question; that the employees clerks with
his direction or knowledge made out the voucher
containing the names OF the articles set forth in
the Indictments and gave them TO him to enable
him TO collect the money actually due to him.
they stating TO him that this Was necessary ina
order TO reach an appropriation; and that he
used the vouchers SO furnished TO him. and by
means thereof procured the payment OF bills OF goods
for which ne actually furnished goods that had
been called foib the ordersrom the bureau signed
by the surgeon general; and that before he signed
or presented any voucher bill IL was sent to or
delivered TO him made out in the handwriting OF a
clerk OF the department and approved by The sur
geOn general.
Mr. WOrthington said he would not accent such
an admission, as he proposed TO show that no arti-
cleS furnished at all, except such as were ac
counted for I'm other vouchers
The witness then examined as to other
vouchers and said that the articles named were
not furnished He had never heard OF Agnew's
patent autopsical table, or Agnews patent invalid
bedstead He identified the handwriting in several
OF the bills presented as KirkwoodS.
Mr.. WILSON'S ADDRESS.
Mr.. Wilson, in his opening address to the Jury
yesterday said they would show that the orders
given to Mr. Dempsey were signed by the surgeon
general, giving list of the articles wanted. and
these articles were duly furnished They would
show that they furnished the specific goods called
for and furnished account TO the DEPARTMENT
HNt yr<n<11 rf-I,<I