Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1892-03-04

were f0und TO correspond WIN the llstS
furnished by the clerk, paid them. 1t
now turns out, as | am advised, that
there were no such witnesses summoned,
nor were they in attendance, nor even
in existence. The fee bills are in fact
fraudulent, the endorsements on them
are fictitious, and the lists certifying
them under the seal of the court, were
likewise fraudulent. l am informed
that even the witness books in the
clerks Office fail TO show that any such
witnesses were summoned or claimed
attendance. But this is depression. l
was about to tell you how the fraud
was discovered.
The particular case referred to was
on the docket during eight terms OF
Court, and in that time the State paid
81, 925. 40 of fraudulent witness certifi-
Gates in this case. Besides this, in this
same case, there were over 81, 500 OF
fraudulent witness certificates issued
and sold TO innocent persons, but which
l refused to pay when presented, hav-
ing suspected fraud.
After all this occurred, and my sus-
picionS were aroused, | concluded to
confer with Governor Fleming, in May,
1890, submitting to him the correspond
ence shown you. The Governor advised
me to write to Judge A. l. Foreman on
the subject. and inquire of him about
this Braham case. l then addressed
this letter to Judge Boreman:
CHARLESTON, May 10, 1890.
Hon 4. T. Borcmdn, Judge Ffth Judicial
District, PGrkersburg, ". Va.
DEAR SIR:-Will you do me the favor TO
inform me of the status of the case of the
State VS.. VIM. Braham, charged with felony
in your county. Allowances to witnesses
have been reported to this Office by the
clerk of the Circuit Court of Wood county,
running through terms of court for the
last three years. The cost TO the State in
this case for witnesses attendance has al
ready reached a large amount L have
been reliably informed that the defendant
had never been arrested. have declined
TO pay further claims in this case until l
am advised by you.
Yours respectfully,
[Signed 2. +. DUFFY,
Auditor.
l received this reply TO my letter to
Judge BOreman:
PARKERsBURG, w. VA, May 18th, 1890.
Hon. T. +. DUFFY, auditor:
DEAR SIR:-Yours of the 18th inst. re-
ceived, inquiring as to the case OF the
State V. WA. Braham, on charge OF
felony, in the Circuit Court Of Wood coun-
", and referring 10 the large amount OF
fees ia the case fol- witnesses. l nave ex-
amined into the case and find that the in
dictment was found several years since and
caplas was issued, but Braham has
az informs
me, as is his uniform practice, he issued
the subpGnas for the witnesses in order
that the case would be ready for trial on
the part of the State in case the accused
should be arrested. | find, however, that
at the last November term the case against
Braham was stricken from the docket and
was thus ended. / have instructed the
clerk for the future not to issue subpGnas
for witnesses in criminal cases until the
party charged has been arrested.
Very respectfully, etc,
[Signed.l A. l. BoREMAS,
Judge, etc.
This letter confirmed my suspicious
OF fraud. You will observe that the
Judge says the case was dismissed at
the November term, 1889, and yet / had
before me the Clerks report of witness
fees at the February term, 1890, report
ing between $500 and 500 OF witness
ices in this Braham case. The fee bills
followed this report, and were present
ed for payment, but refused, notwith-
standing this letter which | received
from the Prosecuting Attorney OF Wood
county:
PARKERsBURG, w. VA, July 18th, 1870.
Hon. p. +. Duff, Auditor, Charleston:
hoo. tod nv
holders by assignment of witness certif-
Gates in case of State VS.. VIM. Braham for
felony, in our Circuit Court, to write you
in reference to the same The case had
| been pending tor long time. When came
into Office as Prosecuting Attorney | knew
nothing about the case except what ap-
peared by record. At November term, 1889,
i directed the case to be left on the
docket, as various capiases had
been returned mot found" But no
| order was made except memorandum
on the clerks docket The record shows
| the witnesses proved their attendance at
the February term, 1890, and the deputy
| clerk claims that the subpoenas were IS
sued, served, and witnesses appeared regu-
| larlv and proved their attendance. 1t was
my general order to the clerk 10 issue sub
poenas in ell criminal cases in order that
| no State case should be delayed oy the
! State. II you should desire any further in
! formation at my hands will gladly fur
nish all at my command.
Very respectfully,
TSipned1 L. T. CALDWELL
Prosecuting Attorney
p. S.-Please reply that l may know
what to say TO the parties.
Signed Z. L. u, +. A.
1t is needless for me to say that, as
there were no such witnesses, the
clerks record in Wood county, does not
! show their attendance.
After you were satisfied with the
| fraudulent character of these transac-
tions, what course did you pursue?
| conferred with Governor Fleming
and the Attorney General. Then follow
the investigation which revealed the
state Of the facts, and resulted in the
| finding Of numerous indictments against
the deputy clerk of the court, E. Ward
| CloustOn.
Under our statute, Mr.. Duffy, the
clerk is not authorized 20 purchase
these witness certificates. To whom
! then were the payments made?
IL all cases the certificates purported
10 be endorsed by the witnesses TO whom
they were payable, and were collected
through the banks.
| How about the fraudulent certificate:
in the other fifty-two eases which you
referred to? What is the nature ol
! them?
I W, many ~ then, are similar IN