Telegram-herald., 1891-07-29
HE ACTUALLY SKIPPED
Judge Adsit's Opinion Of Treas
urer Perry's Hegira-
THE NOHL ATTACHMENT SUSTAINED
Its Sole sad OaIy Feuadatien Was the
AbseondisE OF Defendant Perry.
Piaiatin's Attorney Lsys Bare
the fostering Mess

by Edward T.. Mohl, on the residence
OF Geo. X. Perry. ex-city treasurer. was
begun before Judge AdsIi in the circuit
court. Mr.. MohPs claim WAS for $500
and he swore out the attachment on
hls belief that Perry had Absconded.
The entire issue Of the hearing turned
on that point alone. Ii ii could be
shown that Perry did not skip, the at
tachment would he null and void ;
otherwise Mr.. MOhi's claim was amply
secured. Geo. 7. VANITY was the at
torney for the plaintiff. The attach
ment MAS issued while Perry WAS IN
Chicago 1t was brought out IN the
testimony that Perry's absonting hn-
SELF from the city WAS surrounded With
unusual circumstances. Heretofore
this has been denied by Perry. his
bondsmen and friends. The fact that
The ex-clY treasurer WAS q defaulter
has been buried from sight by the exer-
lions OF those who were interested IN
him. The melton to dissolve the at
tachment OF Mr.. Mohl has, however,
gwen the matter proper ventilation,
and what was heretofore secret, ms
far as substantlation was concerned. Is
now given TO the public. When Perry
first left the city II was announced that
he had gone 10 Cleveland, but several
days afterwards he bobbed up serenely
IN Chicago IN company
with a DisreputabIs Woman.
The next day Lewis Hawkins saw him
there and tried to prevail upon him TO
return. hut could not induce him to do
ko. Several days later Tom Nester and
Andy Bevier searched the city of Chi
.cago from stem to gudgeon, but Perry
could not be found. The disconsolate
lpaIr returned and few days later
Mort. Rathbone. formerly clerk at the
Morton House. but then clerk of the
Wellington Hotel i'll Chicago, sent the
following telegram to Grand Rapids:
"have seen Perry and located him.
Lewis Hawkins, Jas. NJ. Barnett and
Perrys wife made trip to the Garden
City, and Immediately proceeding To
the address gwen, Mr.. Hawkins tapped
at the door. The lsndlady re-
sponded, and. supposing that Perry
was flying under an assumed name,
MIR. Hawkins gave a minute description
OF him and his paramOur. The woman
with whom he was talking, admitted
that there were two such persons stop
ping with her. Mr.. Hawkins told her
to tell the man that the stablemen
wanted to see him. She did as was in
structed. but instead of the decamped
treasurer showing up, the female living
with him came To the foot of the stairs
ank asked if she would not do. Mr..
lAaWklns remarked that If she was the
city treasurer of Grand Rapids she was
just the person he was lookingfo Perry
came to the front and Mr.. Hawkins got
him to GO with them to the Wellington,
where a mortgage for $500 was given
| to Lewis +. Hawkins, James NJ. Barnett,
Martin l.. Sweet and Harvey j. Hollis.
ter, the four men who had become
sureties on Perry's bond as city treas
urer, to secure them against an de.
ficienci-s which might be found IN his
| accounts upon examination. When
the subject of Pcrry's coming back was
broached. he positively refused until
he was assured by his wife and bonds
men that he would not he prosecuted.
Messrs. Hawkins, Barnett. Hollistcr
and Sweet were compelled to sign a
| joint note for $4,000. the sum EN-.
| bezzled, and gave il TO the Old National
Bank, which, after being discounted
| the cash was turned over to the city
The above facts were brought out OF
| Mr.. Hawkins by Lawyer VANITY after the
most diligent and persistent questioning
| Mr.. Barnett testified to practically the
same story. A certified check for SlG,
| 900 was turned over to City Treasurer
Hake by the Old National Bank.
Attorney wanty's Argument.
In summing up the case before Judge
Adsit, Mr.. VANITY argued as follows:
The burden Of proof is on the
plaintiff. to show that Mr.. Perry did
actually abscond from the State. aud
| If. when he went away he only went or
business. as his counsel has stated, ther
the attachment should be dissolved
Did he simply go on business? Did Ia,
return freely to the city of Grand Rap
ids, without inducements being hele
out to mm? We say there is nothing il
the proof TO warrant any such conclu
sion. but on the contrary every word ol
evidence points with unerrIng certaint,
to the conclusion that Mr.. Perry dit
abscond. Now II Is n we'll settled rul,
IN civil cases, that II party to litiga
| ton sits IN the court room, as Mr.
Perry did during this hearing. and fail
to deny or explain the charges agalns
him, the presumption Is stron,
that the charges are true
This is apparent IN this instance he
cause. as the proof shows, II wa
rumored on the streets and printed IL
the newspapers that Mr.. Perry wa
| short IN his accounts with the city an,
had absconded with notorious woman
| Then, the facts were sworn to here yes
tcrday that Mr.. Perry's shortage wa
Sl6. 900. and that he Was weeks IN Chr
cago living with a woman not his wife
and that the only way. after DAYS o
effort. he could be induced to return t,
the city, was the assurance given hin
Ivy his bondsmen and wife, whom HI
had so cruelty wronged and who per
sonallv had 10 60 20 chicago and con
duct MN home, that he would no
I've prosecuted. Now, that proof Mr.
Perry sat here and listened to. II
was not true, ard every inference ths
could be drawn from II was not true. h
was called upon by all ties O
family. friends and his good nsme &
deny IL. He was yesterday gwen IN
opportunity 10 explain these mystel
lous circumstances under oath. ~.
wife and children, he frseads and wei
wshers. those who bad gwen him 20.
ton and confidence. bad right TO ~
denial, 4 "a could be denied. bat NJ
Perry. by h.s silence said. ~ - true
and the most uafsvo'sbie Inference
from tss damaging testimony esanr
sse denied or erpls lie sad hy h
silence. % - true that
shesta Ne ~ tss stat. rffsc-
81 IseksoF,. snd q !. oalv hecsusc {
the lenseneF of hlvfnE ale ard kin
! lssffsl.ss ntt vha have s5t al usd ar