The evening world., 1894-06-12
o,7IMAN ON The RACK.
0 Staten Island Magnate Scored
Ma by Wellnan.
Finger Testifies Regarding the
Fra, Check Bearing His Name.
her Witnesses Put on the Stand
W., by the Prosecution.
;rastus Wiman's con, Harry Dunn
man, a reporter, sat beside his father

Ter and Terminer this morning when
shi~istant District-Attorney Francis L.
LIE Imam, the most formidable and most
intentless of the county's prosecutors,
ahcd the Jury the story of the alleged
alsime Of Erastus Wiman.
nlodr. Wellman described forgery in the
icond degree. for which a convicted
fr.rson may be consigned to prison for
arm years.
heErastus Wiman. a man of three score
te'ears, who has attained a reputation
fanat extends all over America, is
Is charged with the simple crime of draw
stag a check on his firm, r. G. Dun &
ouo., for 5000. in favor of Il. w. Bull
ginger & Co., az he was empowered to
lido; Of forging the signature of L. w.
'Bullinger & Co. in Endorsement. and
OF then indorsing it himself and de-
posting 1t to his own private account
In the Central National Bank.
The facts on which the charge of
forgery is based will not be disputed by
the defense. but, in the words of Gen.
y. f.. Tracy, of counsel for the Cana
dian-American the. contention will be
" 10 .he legality OF those acts of Mr..
The defense will claim first that Mr..
MWiman was a member of the firm of r.
right to draw on the firm, and. third,
that the use Of the name of Bullinger, as
arawee, vas nothing more than the use
latest dec sion of the Supreme Court of
this department, and never disturbed by
the Court Of Appeals.
1889 Erastus Wiman was a member OF
the firm Of Dun. Wiman G. Co. In 1889
the firm became r. G. Dun & Co, and
became an employee. receiving as com
pensation. as General Manager a sum
equivalent to one-sixth Of the net profits.
which Melted him SIS, 900 or $50, 900 a year.
The prosecution dilated on Mr.. Dun
having founded the great mercantile
agency fifty years go; how he took up
ward, and how Wiman had turned in
crate and robbed his benefactor.
The defense |. fen s., VIII try to show that this
That Wiman had built up a splendid
business for the firm of Dun. .Wiman &
GO, IN Toronto, when, IN 1855, he was
ness that was not making a dollar; that
he built up the business to its present
magnificent proportions. with an income
to Dun of $500, 900 or more pc r annum.
Erastus Wiman. listened with the in
terest Of an outsider when Mr.. Wellman
said he would show that Mr.. Wiman had
ing the year prior to Feb. 6. 1893, the date
of the Bullinger check, one of which was
to ]. N. Fairbanks for $4,000.
Gen. Tracy entered his objection here.
He said Mr.. Wiman was on trial for an
alleged crime.
Wiman wrote the signature on the back
Of the check. In accordance with the
well recognized and legally established
Justice Ingraham permitted Mr.. Well
man to go on. and holding up the check
1.-The ~magnanimous admission of Gen.
Tracy that Mr.. W'man signed f. w.
Bullinger's endorsement is because they
ant deny it. FOR Mr.. Wiman confessed
piioyers. And this is not Wfiman's hand:
It IS disguised; WIZ did he %disgqise IT,"
pvery, of the forgery r.. G.. Dun found
%S SiS not sbo of an s7's ssort agile w the eS Saxs
Ing covered II up by skilful manipula-
tion of checks.
of s155,0 600 in ISL, spoke to Mr.. Wiman
A3n his " bank for si35,o 900. Next day
MWiman said. Don't deposit that check
u ct and kept him along from day to
n lay, the bookkeeper holding the check
ourteen months.
resented a check. drawn to Z. w.
wv The bank didn't like the W. and
j nt the indorsement and got Bullinger
o indorse 1t, telling him it had been
kars sssnts by tb mis take h. Mkt Next m nrI,tan he he
( in a disguised hand Il. w. B~ullinger.'
H failed shortly after for 1000, 900 OIL
10 per cent. capital. which shows his
financial straits. the motive for the
The articles Of agreement between r.
q. Dun, Wiman and Arthur J. King and
put in evidence. They stated that r.
g. Dun was and should continue to be
the sole owner. and would pay a sum
Nprofts.
o. The agreement speaks of this per
\, Tor determining the amount OF salary,
hut 1t also says that should either
ment shall il" Continue rle'f IN force ats ' the " heirs
taking Inc place Of the deceased.
James Harral was called as the frs,
90. He testified that he drew the Bul.
linger check at the direction OF Erastus
Wyiman; The firm signature was in Mr.
, Mdlman,s in hh bTs W writ bsrd ana f. "iman'
Cross;examlning, Gen. Tracey, drew on,
that Wiman was the general supesin,
name and to act for the arm.
MI. Dun had not directed the filling OF
check in ten wears, and seldom visited
ness as Its responsible head.
Edward "; Builinger, publisher o.
an account against r. G. Dun & Co. OF
business with Mr.. wiman. Il Feb,
ruary, 1893. r. G. Dun & Co. owed him
$4,000 or more. but he had made no de.
mand on account. Bullinger denied the
signature of E.. w. Bullinger to the
check which is the subject of this con
troversy.
He said the writing was not at all like
his, and he had never seen the check til
the Indictment of Wiman. He had never
authorized Wiman to sign his name.
Mr.. Wiman called at my Office two
weeks after the date of the check" ties,
tilted Mr.. Bullinger. HE came to see
me about my account, Mr.. Douglas hav'
Z Ing called the day before. He asked me
M 20 make some credits on the bill as II
had received the payment. l requested
HIM to make out a statement in writing
Of what he wanted. He went away say.
ING he would, but never did. That was
&~Rturday, Feb. IS. There was no ref.
renee to the check of Feb. 6, which ]
new nothing of at that time. He gave
ID reason for his request"
Zen. Tracy began his c~ross-examina
ON by having Bullinger sign his name
~ d q slip OF paper. He got the witness to
Gay that the alleged forgery OF his sigma
ture had not the slightest resemblance
to his handwriting, and that Mr.. Wiman
had hundreds OF samples OF his hand
writing had he desired to copy his sigma
ttlrQ-