Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1885-01-31

The Case OF John w. Drew Given to
the Jury this Aftern0on-Instruc
of the Court.

teruay afternoon In the case of John W. Drew
charged With presenting false and fraudulent
CLAIMS upon the bureau Of medicine and surgery,
said mat II the defendant had summoned him to
TESTIFY as to his high standing in the community
ms testimony would have been as strong as that of
any OF The estimabe gentlemen who had been on
the stand. He had doubt that some OF the Jury
, $1,000 Ia the same position. They could there
iofe appreciate the embarrassment under which he
iaDofed and he could see the embarrassment that
tDet ,hem upon the threshold of the case. He re-
nilhueu them, however, OF their duty. which should
eAciude such considerations. He then reviewed the
charges. which were that the defendant had pre-
s eleeo ana collected three different fraudulent
Claims respectively for the sums of 81 ssS 81 Si-
~ ana 81 tta.S4 He reviewed the testimony as to
tne delivery of goods from Drew's store TO the
uu,eau OF medicine and surgery. He devoted most
OIL ms address, which occupied about two hours, to
an eS pianat.on OF what the government claimed
were fahrications in Mr. Drew's books He claimed
tae III one instance the true account with the bu-
.eau Oh medicine and surgery had been torn out of
I.e pook, and fictitious account written in upon
auotnef page, the necessary erasures and altera-
tionS pelhg made In the index. He pointed to the
1act That while all other accounts i'm the ledger in
question were closed in January. 1882 the supposed
iidotCated account was carried on for 10 months
longer These fictitious accounts, he claimed had
been inserted in the book since the tria and
niaue up 10 meet papers put in evidence by the
government.
TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.
"hen the court met thlS morning Mr.. Moore
rising, referred to the length OF the case, which
had occupied week. All the evidence the case
senteo TO the jury. After consultation he said the
counsel Tor defense had concluded not to address
tne Jury having confidence in the Intelligence AND
integrity OF the jury and of the Instructions which
would be given by the court
"Ihat VIII cut you of" said the court, turning to
DStrict Attorney W0rthington.
II am entirely content to be cut of on those
terms, said Mr.. Worthington.
MI, Mr.. Moore then presented a number of prayers
neSe prayers were to The effect that il the fury
believed that the defendant furnished to the bu-
tsau Vi Hedlcne and surgery goods 10 the value OF
tne articles charged, and did not present the bills
lOf le purpose and with the intention OF defraud
ing the government, they should acquit There
were several prayers, putting in different form the
proposition that the intention OF the defendant to
ue1raud was essential to guilt
Another prayer asserted the principle that the
burden or proof was on the government; another
tnaI the jury must in order TO convict believe the
suill OF the defendant is established beyond all
reasonable doubt.
The last prayer sets forth that though the Jury
might believe that pfima facia case was made
out by the government. yet one not entirely free
OF doubt, and that doubt one which might be ex-
not convict.
Mr.. Moore asked the court also to Instruct the
Jury as TO the weight OF evidence and the discretion
OIL tue jury in giving credit to testimony etc He
READ also section from Whartons "Crfminal Evil
uence,' commenting upon the bias OF expert wit
heSseS employed upon either side and the little
weight that should be given to their conclusions
MT WorthlBgton said that he desired to speak as
10 the prayer, which virtually declared that when
a man ADMITS that he presented TO a paymaSter a
Dill and certificate for goods which he knew he had
never delivered, he should not be convicted. The
whole defense was that the defendant had deliver
ed certain articles, but there was no appropriation
out OF which to pay Tor the goods. Therefore, at
lhe 1nSt15atl0n OF clerk, he had made out bill for
g0oGs payable out OF another appropriation lie
Claimed that The object OF these bills was Illegal
the purpose being To avoid compliance with the
statute forbiddlng the payment or contracting for
goods beyond The amount OF available appropri-
atlOn5.
Mr.. Williams said there was no statute making
IL penal Offense TO pay for goods out OF one appro-
prlaLion when they belonged to another; and fur
theTmore II there were such statute this tndict-
ment made no such change In this case the de-
fendant asserted that he had furnished an euuya-
lent Tor every dollar he had received, and had made
out his Dill according TO the instructions given him
pS an ol1Cer OF the department to which the goods
were furnished In these respects the case was en-
tlreiy different from the others which had been
tired by The court
JUDGE wYLIE's CHARGE TO THE JURY
Judge Wylie then began his charge to the Jury
The defendant, he said, was charged with violating
certain statutes OF the United States When they
entered upon the trial there were indictments
pending, Of the Old and 3 OF the new series. A
nolle pros. had been entered as to one of the Old
indictments. So they had 6 indictments before
them. AS to the Old ones, each contained 2
counts Each OF The new ones contained counts
1hey mad then In all 10 pending counts. But In
TACT thefe We're but three counts to which they
had had any evidence. The defendant might be
found guilty under counts, in which case the Jury
would have 70 specify which three counts The
first count OF the Old indictments charged forgery
the I'd count was hot relied upon by the prosecution
II they found him guilty OF perjury the court did
not see how they could find him guilty OF the other
crimes charged. This waS not strictly a charge of
forgery as known TO the common law. Every forged
claim against the government must be false,
fraudulent and fictitious claim. II they believed
he manufactured these claims, he might be found
guilty under the FIRST count or the Old series But
II they did this they could not find him guilty
under any other count. They might find him gem
orally guilty under either OF the series OF indict-
ments The theory upon which these counts were
Constructed were that they were only varying
statements OF the same offense They could not
convict him of the charges made in these fnditt-
meats, unless they believed the specific charges
had been made out Evidence had been admitted
as TO other transactions lor tie purpose or showing
how the business was conducted, and the rela-
tons or the defendant with the department
AS to the charge OF forgery the law requires that
the charge should be made out exactly as specified
Ia the Indictment. For any thing that appeared IN
the indictment, Whtlethese claims might be frauiu-
lent, there was nothing TO show that they were not
signed by Surgeon General Wales. Ii the claims
however, We're made up after Surgeon General
would be forgery as forgery does not consist only
IN concentrating signature. Ii they had rea-
after Surgeon General Wales signed the paper: Ii
they believed the weight of evidence showed that
there was no change after the surgeon general
signed the papers, there would be no forgery
IL might be trick and fraud, but 1t was not a
forgery. He thought the evidence was OF SO doubt
ful character as to this subject that the Jury
ought not 20 fiEd the defendant guilty of forging
the claims Surgeon General Wales himself could
not say whether the papers were to-day in the con-
dltion in which they were when he signed them or
not. II the jury to the conclusion that 1t was
not clear that the papers were altered after the
signature or Dr. Wales Was appended, they should
acqit TO all three Of the Indictments OF the first
series. The second count, it was admitted. should
not be considered, us the evidence not appica-
bic 10 it.
The district attorney reminded the court that
nOile presses had been entered as to the first and
second counts OF the new series leaving only the
second count In each OF the new indictments To
prevent confusion he would now enter nolle proSeS
as TO each OF The old indictments.
The court proceeding, said the substance OF the
second count in the new indictments was that the
defendant in each of the three cases had
a false and fraudulent claim, and that in order
to procure the allowance OF the
false claim he. procured fraudulent certificate
signed by surgeon General Wales, knowing that
the certificate had been obtained by fraud Ii the
certificate OF Surgeon Wales had been obtained
Trauauientiy. and the defendant knew that fact,
and the certificate was USED In support of ira I'D
uent claim, that would sustain this count. There
were three things neCeSSaPy-firSt, that the claim
was false and fraudulent; second that the: certif
cate was obtained by fraud, and third, that the
defendant knew that fact.
Referring TO the prayers relating to the intention
OF the defendant to defIaud, the court said the
statute claimed no such language. Ii the defend
ant knew the claim false and that the certificate
was improperly obtained, the crime waS complete
notwithSta nding the fact that he believed or in.
tended only 10 collect what was justly owing to
him. The defense maintained that Ii the defend
apt fpfap dnfi -l,f1x