The Washington times., 1894-06-15
WIMAE BETRAYED His TRUST
DAMAGING Admissions Made Under
Cr0SS-examinatiOn.
VIOLATED STRINGENT RULES
edge-Received Money of the Firms and
Appropriated 1t to His Own Usc-No En-
tries Made in the Books at the Time.

NEW YORK, June 14.-When the trial oil
Erastus wiman. charged with forgery. was
resumed to-day, Mr. wiman described to the
Jury the circumstances which led up to the
writing of the letter of February 20, 1893.
Mr.. Wiman explained that Lawyer Mac
Farland had telegraphed him TO come to his
office. He did so without delay and was
then told by Lawyer MacFarland that gross
irregularities had been found in his accounts.
MacFarland told me- said Mr. Wiman, that
would have to transfer all my property 10 MT
Dun and that my vile was to make slniiiar
transfer of all her property. L was also 10
acknowledge in a letter TO Mr.. DUN any wrong
doing. This letter l wrote without delay.
"Were you much perturbed at the timer?
~ was almost beside myself with the awful OK.
:ent and suddenness OF my ruin
Mr. Wiman went on TO say that the letter was
mailed by him TO Mr. Dun.
The letter had subsequently been seen by Mr..
Mcfarland The latter had said mat the tone OF
the letter was satisfactory to ME- Dun
II then transferred all my. property to Mr.
Dun Ny wife, who was in California at the time
the trouble came, lost no time IN returning East,
and she, too, turned over everything she had
also transferred 10 Mr.. Dun all had in the
way of stocks, bonds, and securities.h
MIR Wiu,an said that Lawyer Mcfarland had
solemnly assured him that no action would be
taken against him. he made the defendant
promise, however, that under no circumstances
would he [WIman) connec. himself with a rival
"Now, you had ample time to go away had
rou feared prosecution, didn't your"
~ certainly had"
Coming down to the 5000 note Mr.. weIlman
asked Mr.. Wiman why he never told MIR. Dun
about il
II thought he knew about it" said Mr. wiman
tbs it not fact, and have not ali your wit
nesses testified, that Mr.. Dun had not examined
the books for thirteen vears2"
Mr. Wiman thought he had seen Mr.. Dun look
Ing over the books at different times. lie ad-
United, in answer to Mr.. Weilman's question,
that Mr. Dun trusted him implicitly
ais IL not fact that through some indis-
erection you caused Mr. Dun displeasure far
back as lSSlf'
Mr. wiman after some hesitation reluctantly
admitted that he had.
"Did you not think Mr.. Dun was always actu-
ated by high sense of Iustice?"
"Yes, 1 think he would be now If he were left
alone"
After recess Mr. Weliman continued his
searching cross examination of Mr. Wiman with
view to attacking the credibility of the wit
that he had committed no other fault than that
of overdrawing his accounts, Mr.. Wellman had
Mr.. Wiman identify letter of his written
IN Marcn q, 1888, and said
"You say it was the rule of the concern TO have
no paper ont? Did you not, in defiance of this
and unknown to Mr.. Dun, borrow $4,000 in this
manner from the Chemical National Banki
~ did" said Mr.. Wiman.
y Mr. Nellman and Mr. Wiman identify letter
written on March 80 1888, to Mrs. r C. Dun The
letter expressed contrition for his fault, re-
GREETED he had lost the confidence and friendship
of Mr.. and Mrs Dun and implored forgiveness.
"Did you not few months after your contri-
tion and your promises to do better, in April,
1854, abstract SIS coo from the collection depart
ment and apply it to your own uses2" said Mr..
Welman
~ took the money. Ihad a right to do so as
partner"
'Did you pay it back before they took you to
task?" asked Mr.. Welman
~ think did before any one knew Of 1t.
took il in parts"
Mr.. weIiman asked: SIS this copy of a letter
you wrote september 20, 1889.
Yes"
al ask, did you not within seven months ap-
propriste 5000 of the funds
at was charged to me-"
"But WIS that entered in the accounts for q
full vear2"
~ reported it 10 tho firm"
Then hr. Wellman asked why letter, &C.
knowledGing the receipt of certain moneys, was
not copied.
"a did not know that it was not copied"
But look at itl" exclaimed the cross
examiner
The 1880 draft was not charged to wiman
until the end of the year.
y letter 10 the Philadelphia manager was
read. 1t spoke 0. the great necessity FOR money
at that time, ana that remittance would do
great good
'sDid you not receive $4,000 from Philadelphia
In March, 1891, and appropriate it to your own
use2'
"Yes,' family
"But was this entered in the books for almost
eleven monthss"
mo, do not know but that it appeared in the
weekly statement"
"MGrch IS, 1891, did you receive from the Buf-
falo Office 5000, and did you apply that to your
own usesi"
"ies, sir"
"Wili you explain why the letter acknowlcdg-
Ing this letter was not copied"
~ don't know whether IL vas copied"
The case was adjourned till tomorrow.