St. Paul daily globe., 1893-10-13
GEORGE NOT A VERY GOOD SON.
Cumulative Testimony That a
Series of Forgeries Was Com
mitted-The Elder Morse Vir-
tualIy Conyicts His Son-More
Expert Evidence-Case Draw
ing to a Close.

settlement, and that witness had re-
ceived his commission of fourth of
per cent, amounting to little over S12,
for negotiating the deal.
Mr.. jerks is of the opinion that Mr..
Bartleson desired to intimate to the
jury that lie was personally interested
in the trial and had divided
the spoiIs with George Morse. with
out, of course, saying so. He con-
siders that in case the note proves
a forgery that he is not in the least de-
gree responsible, but that the bank
which advanced the money will be
liable, and it has its remedy on the
Elisha Morse Endorsement. Mr.. jerks
claims that, whichever way the suit
turns out, he will still have recourse.
Mr.. Morse was again put on the wit
ness stand. He denied having signed
the $1,000 note in issue, and never re-
membered to have seen Mr.. jerks on
the occasion when he claimed to have
called at his office. He bluntly denied
the story told by jerks as having oc-
CURED. In regard to the Veasy estate,
he said he had fully settled that and
held receipts. This was in 1889. To the
heirs direct he had handed over S95, 900
in stocks, real estate, notes, etc, and
not to his son George, as had been testi-
fed to. What he had given to his son
was at the request of the heirs, to whom
he had recommended George.
On the Veasy matter he was asked If
he had been advised that the heirs had
any legal claim on him for the money
George Morse appropriated, and, after
some opposition, witness replied:
Il understood that l was not liable. l
paid it because / didn't want to see the
children lose one cent of the money"
"Were you not advised by counsel that
a settlement would stand off law suit
and trouble If you settled for George?"
IL was"
Then Mr.. Bartleson handed over a
memorandum book, which Mr.. Morse
said was a list of true notes, and the
disputed note was not there entered.
The witness objected to having Oppos-
ing counsel see the book. as he did not
desire it to become public property.
They will not be-" said Mr.. Bartle-
son.
The court has no power to withhold
from the public what becomes record
of this court" said Judge Hicks.
81 don't know as my newspaper
friends are entitled to use what they see
fit" said Mr.. BartlesOn. in some heat.
"They have the right unless it is a
matter of public policy 10 withhold
them, when the court might use its
power" said the court firmly.
Then the counsel and witness talked
over certain notes he had endorsed for
his son, including up for the reputed
forgery of sc, 900 dated in 1888. These,
three notes of 500 each, made by Eu-
gene Crooker, and indorsed in the firm
name by George Morse, and note paid
at the Bank of Minneapolis for 5000,
in February last, Mr.. Morse swore were
the only papers of the kind he had ever
placed his name upon for his son. He
did remember. however, an instance in
real estate deals where he had signed
as security two notes which lie had had
to pay.
When witness was shown the check
given by George w. jerks with his sup
posed Endorsement thereon, he said:
Il never saw this before, it was re-
turned from the bank, and it is not my
signature"
''In whose handwriting is that in
dOrSement|
After studying it closely, can swear
positively that it is my son Georges.
There is one characteristic l notice
especially"
did you ever authorize any one to
sign it? ?''
mo, sir, never"
Mr.. Peterson took the witness for
crosS-eXaminatiOn, and made him state
that he borrowed 1900 to fix up the
Veasy estate.
In that settlement with the estate
you turned over for cash you had re-
ceived mortgages on land you had plat
ted yourself"
~ eS, sir.''
"rhe heirs hired attorneys to compel
you to make those mortgages good,
didn't they?'
They hired them for a settlement" F"
"Didn't they hold you for the full
amount >"
They tried to. as all will do if they
cam"
Didn't all the heirs hire attorneys to
force settlement at that time ?"
mo, sir. There were two other set
Elements before. Louis E. Herndon, one
of the heirs, came for settlement July
10. 1892, looked over the books and
found a shortage, although 1 don't
know the amount. put in $1,000, and
charged it to George. Then Harry c,
Veasey went to see Mr.. Noyes, and they
fixed up settlement with Gearge."
'Were there other attorneys beside
Mr.. Noyes after you for settlement?''
Some came to George, but none to
me-"
Did George ever pay you any money
in the tall and winter of 1922"
Not one cent"
Didn't you in deposition in the case
of Brown against Ames swear that this
notebook did not contain all the notes
you ever made"
II don't KNOW"
but now you swear that there are
none ever made that is not in it."
"Well, think, perhaps"
Does, or does not this book contain
memorandus of all your notes?''
81 should like to look and see."
'But didn't you swear on your direct
examination that it'contained all?''
Mr.. Morse could not positively remem-
ber at first, but at last he said that it
held memoranda of all the paper he
had ever made for which he was liable,
He said that he had given George au-
thority to sign notes, but afterwards
had reuoked it. Then came the follow
ing:
"Didn't Mr.. Noyes claim that you had
indorsed Georges management"
81 don't know as"
Answer my question"
"He was gentlemanIy to me and ]
| was gentlemanly TO him. / don't know
as he claimed that"
George bale then testified as to his
acquaintanceship with the Morse fam
| lily, and thought he was an expert in the
matter OF the writing of the father anC
son. He believed the writing on the
note to be that of George and not ol
Elisha Morse. He was asked if he hac
| auy especial reason for thinking so. anC
an objection to his answering was made
| Then Mr.. Bartleson offered to show by
the witness that George had admitted t.
him in November last that he had float
ed large quantities of the same paper
The court was in deep doubt as t
| whether the evidence was admissible
and took time to read up. The plaint-
ifs attorney didn't want to be the vic
tim of any such surprise. and insisted
that mis- side didn't have to be bound by
any such alleged confession-whereil
the case became more like the famou:
Cullom case. The court stated that tht
! ha