Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1889-12-12

Stands frid iaf Alleged EnbaI1Ansat
iron Kilsley Ace.


i The case of State -. J. A. 4. Biackhal
vas taken up At 10 o'clock Wednesday morn
ing. The respondent vas placed at the bar
and arraixned upon the indictment for em-
besrlement from the arm Of Kinsley & Jor
dan. brokers. Of Auburn, and pleaded not
snilty. Brown Z johnson appear for the
respondent. The claim on the part Of the
government is that the respondent vas hired
By the complainants. Kinsley 4 jordan, to
go to WAterville and work up stock broker.
age business. for which he vas to receive ~
compensation, his actual necessary expenses
until the business had become profitable
enough 70 warrant An advance in salary,
that he was to make to his employers daily
reports Of all his receipts and expenditures;
that in pursuance of this contract he received
large sums Of money from customers, which
belonged to Kinsley 4 jordan, for which he
gave the receipts Of the arm. but. though
making daily returns. did not include In them
several large sums thus received, and fraud
ulently converted such sums to his own use,
to the amount Of about slt)0; that on being
confronted with the charge that he had ap-
propriated money Of the complainants he
acknow ledged his guilt and promised to make
restitution if given time.
A. L. Kinsley Was the fret witness called
bv the government, and testified In subs lance
that he was member Of the Arm Of Kinsley
& Co. consisting Of himself and X. 4. Jor.
dan. doing stock brok rage business in
Lewiston; that he made contract with res
pondent to 90 TO Waterville, start an office,
and work for what trade be could get. to re-
ceive as compensation his actual necessary
expenses until the business was worked up
to such proportions that the Arm could pay
salary; that be was to keep cash book Of
all the money paid out and received, and
also to make daily statement Of such re-
cepts and disbursements. THE book kept
by respondent and the daily reports we're
produced ard placed in evidence He also |
testified that on the 26th of October he went
to Skowhegan and saw the Hesel,ons, and |
the next day went to Waterville and saw
respondent and accused him Of using M ,ney |
of the firm for his own purposes, and for =
while he pretended he hadn't done so but on |
being cornered admitted that he was short
three hundred and odd dollars in the Hesei-
ton deals. and showed the sheet, where he |
had figured up. We filed the orders Of our
customers for stocks through the Doran 4 |
Wright Co. Of Boston, and after deducting |
commissions and profits, defendant was In |
structed to deposit the balance to the credit |
of Doran & Wright Co. in the Peoples Bank. |
He was instructed, and did sign. our firm
name to contracts with customers.
On cross examination he testified that his |
firm were running what 10 popularity known
as bucket shops" and explained the man.
ner of doing business in them thus: II the |
firm received an order for 80 shares Of stock
at l09. the shares were bought on margin |
of one dollar per share aud upwards, the
buyer paying in that amount. II the stock
goes up point and the buyer chooses TO
sell, he makes profit. If it falls point he
loses what he has put in unless he protects il
by the payment of another like amount. II
it falls still lower he must still protect II by
re margins or lose all be has put in. The
commission of the firm is one quarter of the
first margin. II one hundred shares were
taken the commission to the firm would be
S25. The deals with the Heseltons had not
been closed at the time of the admission
made by respondent At Waterville. II It
had been closed at tha, time the Heseltons
would have been entitled to s3iS.75. Re-
spOndent, after his trial at Waterville, ad-
mtted to witness that he had got upwards of
$4,000 out Of the Waterville office.
j. ID. Titcomb testified that he paid respon.
dent $50 for the purchase Of oats and q
short time after gave him $50 on the same |
deal