The evening world., 1894-07-09
PLEADING FOR W|MAN
Gen. Tracy Asks for Certificate
of Reasonable Doubt.
Says that Intent to Defraud Was
Not Properly Proven.
-
The Judges Charge Left The Jury
No Alternative

! for the motion, Assistant DistrictAttor-
ney Lindsay opposing.
+ Because of the odor OF escaping gas,
Justice Barrett adjourned the hearing
from the Chamber of the Court Of
Oyer and Termine- to the Supreme
Court, General Term. room.
| Erastus Wiman was convicted a mon III
ago Of forgery In the second degree, in
indorslng the signature OF Il. w. Bullin-
ger on O $500 check drawn by the de-
PENDANT againet his firm. Il. G. Dun G.
Co.. and In favor OF Bullnger, supposed
ly in payment of debt of the arm to
Bullinger, but, az was shown, deposting
| the check in his own bank to his own
credit.
Justice Ingraham, now In Europe,
sentenced the Canadian-American to
Sing Sing for five years and six months
Gen. Tracy insisted that the proof of
the criminal intention of Wiman had
tice Ingrahsm's charge to the jury on
that point left them no alternative but
| verdict Of guilty.
The. learned lawyer threshed out the
old straw of evidence in the case. He
told how the provisions OF the con-
tract agreement between r. G. Dun and
MS associates, Wiman Douglas and
s,anip Raw nad IA s nee % a,sfbegarded
that neither Wiman. Douglas nor
Thompson should enter into any other
business venture, Dun himself fire.
enterprises, ir. spite Of the stipulation
| that neither Of the three juniors should
draw more than 5000 Il month. Wman
had for. years drawn two. three or four
times that amount and In spite of the
stipulation that Dun alone should eign
checks, all three had constantly signed
checks and Dun had never signed any.
K.s.s- -.
these things. Including ,Miman's over
drafts Of S2sT,OO0 and his metho1 of
craving checks and indorslng the draw
es,s name n, on them, as If the drawee
IL was insisted that Justice Ingraham
erred when he told the jury that II they
found that wlnan Nrote Buliinger's in
fuLy to use fo- himself, 1t must have
been with criminal intent and forgery.
,, Gen H., Tracy claimed that Ibis was a
whether Wiman thought he lad the
right TO use Bullingcr's name az that OF
a fictitious innOrser.
Justice Ingrahain erred III refusir Y
70 charge at my request that the jury
must ind criminal intent before they
could convict" urged Gen. Tracy.
Gen. Tracy argued that it was for the
jury e, determine whether Wiman had
the right to draw checks for The firm OF
4. q. Dun & Co, the right to draw more
tiIaii NOVWV ~ month IoT IFS own personal
uses, and the right to use the names Of
payees as fictitious names in indorse-
ments.
Gen. Tracy insisted that as Wiman
had the power to draw checks in the
name OF the firm, any number OF fraudu-
lent Endorsements on the check could
not make 1t a fraud on the frm and no.
Again I insist'S said the pleader. .If
Wiman believed he had tile right 70
draw this check and use Bullingers
name as a fictitious payee, there was no
gu'ltv of n crime"
An, but you have said that there is
no contention that Wiman was en-
powered to sign Bullingcr's name" re-
turned Justice Barrett.
II that Is 80 your argument might
extend 10 the pickpocket. and say that
the pickpocket inserting his hand In
nc criminal act because ne believed
pocketbook.
Il certificate OF reasonable doubt IA
usually accompanied by stay OF pro-
ceedings pending the app cal Of the case
TO the General Term
Justice hliretL ordered "a recess at the
close Of Gen. Tracy's two hour arc,l-
ent. Assistant District-Attorney Lind
says argument IL to be heard later
After recess Mr. Lindsay, Assistant
'iHf. H. "a ths, argued in opposition.
Ter of r. g. Dun & co. and Instructed
him to make out the check in question
10, 70 r. w. Bullinger. Mr.; Wiman told
some money on account OF the $1,000 or
SO that was due him. This statement
was false.
Mr.. Boardman--You have no right, Mr..
Lindsay. to msrepresent the testimony.
WI You point out this statement"
Mr.. Lindsay continued. saying that
III the check was signed In disguised
show that unless the amount OF this
particular check was paid to Mr.. WI,
mans private bank account that day
Mr. Wiman would have overdrawn bis
account something like 5000.
dente at the trial to show that MIR
Wiman had admitted that he had used
from MIR. RuilinGcr,
Continuing; Mr.. Lindsay said that the
people would contend that on Mr., WI
mans own confession he was guilty Of
In support OF this, Mr. Lindsay called
attention to the check of Jan. /, which
MI. .Wiman had signed "E W. Bullin-
name. '"'
This showed that Mr.. Wiman had no
right TO sign Bullinger's name" said the
Assistant District-AttoIney
The latter then cited from the evidence
how Nj: WimaI had paid 81 90 10 the
Press cub ana had charged it to Drn
& Co., and how Mr.. Wiman had commit
showed embezzlemeHt.
AS TO the criminal intent; Mr.. Lind
say said that waf ruily shown; that Mr..
WlT-An was never anything but an en-
pioyec aud mad never considered him
Seif a partner
IN oar .. lnion the question is-io|
these acts Complained Of constitute for
gerry" said ~. Lindsay.
I'VE cor. end they do. n VOW lI.uurI
thinkr otherwise. dion this uerauaaut is
entitled 10 q gtriiIC1'a OF reasonable
a,ult. We thIrH, l'wrgrr Tho higher
g. r-'rEsd - clearly ahovH by Mr. vi,
man, having put 8glling ,r's name on in-
vhcci, The pav.c'" mare ~ the check
was uu;hority fcr he brrk 90 Pay the
money"
As 10 Mr Nin'Zn being a partner IN
the FIRM, the people, Ar. Lindsay saii.
cJutcudei mat tGis ha1 no,hlnB to 90
;lsn Of intent 10 defraud. Judge ingraham
gave a more liberal construction to the