St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-02-22

any note, bill of exchange, draft or
other obligations except on the endorse
ments of such papers for the purpose
of deposit or collection for the account
of the association. He also had the
right to assign firm checks for firm pur-
poses only.
All of Wiman's relations to Mr.. Dun,
who was the sole owner OF the business,
Its assets and property of every deScrip-
ton, good will and profits, were eX-
pressed In these papers.
Wiman was salaried manager for
Mr.. Dun, with such powers only as the
contract gave him with additional power
to draw checks. The property of r. &.
Dun & Co. was not his property i'll any
sense. The moneys of r. q. Dun & Co.
were not his moneys in any sense, and
the profits of r. q. Dun & Co. were not
his profits in any sense. And yet by
| various acts of embeZZlement through
Misrepresentation, conce a men I ).
breaches of his agreements, misuse OF
the powers confided to him. and
GROSS USURPATIoN
of powers with which he was not
trusted he succeeded during the years
1888. 1890, 1891. 1892 and up to February,
1898. i'll stealing from Mr.. Dun the
enormous sum Of S229, 9,01S.90.
That sum he owes Mr.. Dun today.
That, i'll view of his relation to the
property of Mr.. Dun. which Winan
helped to manage under the name of Il.
q. Dun q Co., he is guilty of the crime
OF having embezZled the whole, or
greater part of this sum, / have little
doubt.
He has committed so many crimes
that selection for prosecution is diff
cult. What, out of the long list of his
offenSes, have selected for presenta-
ton to you, two forgerieS and two or
more larcenies so perfectly clear, SO
easily established, SO indefensible, that
they will serve the purpose of prosecu-
ton without reference also to others.
1898, r. G. Dun d Co., owing upwards
of $4,000 10 f. w. Bullinger, of this
city, for material purchased. On the
9th of February, 1898, Wlman being i'll
urgent straits for money, directed the
cashier of r. 6. Dun & Co. to make out
check to the order of Mr.. Bulllnger,
and instead of transmitting it to him for
payment of his account, deliberately
forged the name of E. W. Bullinger on
the back of the check and deposited it
to his own credit in his own bank. The
account of Bullinger on the
BOOKS OF THE FIRM
40 QCOllCu Will lu0O III tDC uSudl
course Of the business. | need hardly
say that the assets of Wiman were
wholly without the knowledge of Mr..
Dun or of any of his associates in r. q.
Dun u Co., and that since then they
have paid to Mr.. Bullinger the sum
which Wiman OH the day named ap-
propriated 10y means of forgery to his
own use.
The Campbell Printing Press and
Manufacturing Company case: A few
days before the Bullinger case just
recited, viz: On the Goth day Of
January, 1893. Wiman committed anoth-'
er forgery under circumstances very
similar. On that date r. G. Dun & Co.
owed the Campbell Printing Press and
Manufacturing company the sum of
s.. $50 for two printing presses purchased
i'll May, 1892. Wiman procured from
the cashier of R. e., Dun u Co. cheek
to the order of Ogden Brewer. treasurer
the treasurer of the Campbell COM
pany), Oh the preteXt that he desired to
pay the account.
Thereup0n he went to the Campbell
company, and, telling them that K. q.
Dun q Co. were short of funds. asked
whether they would like notes for their
account instead of cash. On Mr..
Brewer acqulescing in his proposition,
he made two notes covering the amount
in his own name and delivered them to
him. He then forged the name of
Ogden Brewer on the back of the check
and appropriated 1t to his own use. All
of these accounts were concealed from
the knowledge of MIR. Dun or any of his
associates, but they subsequently on
discovering them, paid the Campbell
company the
AMOUNT OF THEIR ACCOUNTS.
fl,,l lnar ,laf y. nj hol
detected, Wiman offered to transfer to
Mr.. Dun certain real estate Oh Staten
island of doubtful value. but Mr.. Dun,
learning that Wiman was lnsolvent,
refused to accept them or to receive any
preference over his other creditors.
Wiman thereupon made formal as
signment for the benefit of his creditors,
but his assets have amounted to almost
nothing.
Mr.. Dun did not submit the proof of
Wlman:s crimes to the authorities Oh
first discovering them for several rea-
sons. In the first place, he was moved
by considerations of sympathy for MIR.
Wiman's family, with whom he had
been Oh terms of friendship for many
years, and by the piteouS appeals for
mercy which Mr.. Wiman made to him
In the letter herewith submitted.
In the second place, he had then no
appreciation of the extent of Wiman's
embeZzlement nor of the length of time,
lasting many years, during which he
had Systematically abused his confidence
and abused the trust reposed in him.
The whole story of his wrong-doing had
to be unearthed from the voluminous
records of the business of four or five
years. 1t has required a vast amount of
labor and time to find all of the rregu-
laritles by which he succeeded in EN-.
beZZling so large sum of money, and
the whole account, with the history of
each item, was not made up until a
comparatively recent date. Again, Mr..
Dun was led to believe by the gross
eXaggeration of Wiman as to the
VALUE OF HIS INTERESTS
on Staten Island that it was possible to
realize something substantial for his
general creditors. many of whom would
suffer more severely than Mr.. Dun.
In view of the fraud practiced upon
them as we'll as upon himself, and the
conviction that man of Wiman's bad
character ought not longer to masquer-
ade as an honest man in this CON-
muuity, and as an adviser and eXhOrter
of youth, and out of sense of obliga-
tion to the mercantile world with which
he is 50 closely identified, he has decided
that his duties require him to expose
Wiman's conduct and to hand him over
to the authorities that he may he dealt
with as the law directs. Affixed to the
foregoing letter were the following
names of witnesses:
+. G. DOUGLAS,
E. w. BULLINGER,
OGDEN BRowER.
Secretary Of the Campbell Company.
-. -. l..