The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1894-06-15
MUST Be CONCLUDED TODAY,
The Close of Erastus Wiman's
Trial.
The Defendant ON the Stand in His
Own Behalf.
He Tries to show That the Alleg ID
Forseries Were Simply overdrafts.
Tho Case to 60 to the Jury
This Afternoon.
~ thu Associated Press.

BY the Associated Press.
New YORK, June 14.-The testimony
for the defense in the case OF Wiman, on
trial for forgery, was closed this after
noon, and the case is expected to 60 to
the jury at the close Of tomorrow's SEES
eion. The defendant himself was on
the stand most of the time, and made
manv admissions under cross-examina-
tion of the repeated use of funds belong
ing to R. G. Dun & Co. These were
called overdrafts by the witness, and he
produced q letter written by himself to
Dun January IA. 1898, in which letter
Wiman explained his financial condition
at length, and informed Dun that II he
had held % per cent of the profits in
January, 1889, instead of IL per cent,
the additional increase to him would
have covered the overdrafts. It was
January l, 1889, that the agreement be-
tween Dun, WimaD, King and Douglass
was made, in accordance with which Mr..
Niman was to get IL per cent of the
yearly profits, instead of the 20 per cent
he had hitherto received. Tie letter
was introduced to show more clearly
that Dun knew all of Wiman's over
drafts.
General Tracey tried to show that
Dun, by arresting Wiman, prevented
financial move on Wiman's part which
would have helped to extricate him
from his difficulties. Judge Ingraham
ruled out all the questions, saying they
had no bearing on the alleged forged
heck in the suit.
Mr.. Wellman then arose to cross-ex-
anime the witness. He began by get
ting Wiman to say that he had been the
brains of R. G. Dun & Co.
"Why 10 it, them" said Mr.. Wellman,
sthat of all the businesses in which you
have been interested the business of r.
g. Dun & Co. has been a success, while
the others were total wrecks?"
perhaps because was better suited
to the mercantile business than to any
other"
Mr.. Wellman's questions caused
Wiman to brace up and retort with
vigor.
Mr.. Wellman referred to the state.
ment of profits OF R. G. Dun & Co. sub
mitted by General Tracey earlier in the
morning. The statement showed that
in 1885 the profits were $345, $50. They
increased steadily until in 1892 they
were $525, 1000. The total from 1885 to
1892, inclusive, was So, 4l6, 800.
In reply to Mr.. Wellman, the defend
ant admitted several instances in which
he had written and telegraphed to the
firms agents, urging quick remittances
on one pretext or another, and then had
applied the money to his own use.
Mr.. Thurber, the well-known whole
sale grocer; Robert X. Klmball, stock
broker; F. 8. Cannon. superintendent
OF the Staten Island Rapid Transit Co.;
J. ]. Withrow, president OF the indus
trial institute OF Toronto, Canada, and
Dennis Stafford of Staten Island, testi-
fed to Mr.. Wimsn's high reputation for
honesty and integrity, after which Gen.
ersl Tracey said:
THAT ie our case"
Mr.. Bullinger Was then recalled by
Mr.. Wellman, who asked him, lis it
true that you were in the habit of loan
ing money!"
ut was not" answered Mr.. Bullinger.
Ibid you ever lend any money to Mr..
Wiman?"
"Only once" said he. "that is ALL"
"Tnat is all" said Mr.. Wellmsn tri
umphantly.
MIR. Dun was then called to the stand
to tell the circumstances of the SAC. 900
note and the 100000. He asserted he
knew nothing eboutthese until they were
called to his attention by his associates.
Before this he thought Wiman's over
draft amounted to $4,000.
Mr.. Dun admitted knowing that
Wiman bad overdrswn his accounts
for the last two or three years, but
pever suspected that the amount in
solved was so large. Mr.. Dun denied
that the prosecution was prompted by
any fear OF Wiman, as intimsted by Mr..
Boardman in his opening address to the
jury.
"When the time comes to charge the
fury" said Justice Ingraham, II shall
tell them that MIR. Dun would not have
done his duty as citizen had he not
lided in the prosecution Of MIR.
Wiman."
At this point court was adjourned
until tomorrow. Judge Ingraham said
he should limit each eide to 80 minutes
in their address to the jury.
"The case must 60 to the jury before