New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-02-22

3 r + :
ERASTTS WIMAN.

degree
conclusive by Mr.. Dun's counsel It is alleged
that MIR Wman obtained 100000 by such for
ceries. Mr. Dun declared that about 100000 in
addition was obtained from him by various
schemes ~ cmbezzlcment The maximum PEN
aty for forgery in the second degree is imprisor-
mcnt for ten years.
Mr. Dun discovered I'm February. 1893. that Mr.
Wlman was largely indebted To the firm. ami
compelled him to leave H. An examination ot
the books was begun which was finished only
this month. Counsel for Mir Dun laid the facts
before Dlstrict-Aitorney Fellows a week ago
Two romplaints were laid before the Grand Jury
Yesterday. The witnesses examined Were r u.
douglass II the mercantile agency of DUN & Co..
40. 3l4 Broadway. T.. ". Bullinger. No. % Full
,on-st. and ogden Brewer. treasurer OF the
Campbell Printing Press and Manufacturing
Company.
TIE SPECIFIC CHARGES
The fret indictment charges that Mr.. Wiman.
on Febr,lary G. lS93 forged the Endorsement OF
Mr Bulllnger to check for 5000. and de-
,s,ted Z, IN his own account. The second In
1tc,,nc,t' alleges that the defendant drew check
for $50 to the order Of Mr.. Brewer in the
rare u Dun & CO.. and then signed Mr.
r-over's name on the back of II. As an Instance
q Mr. Niman's methods IL IS said that wheh
bis sborfac. was discovered h. gave Mr.. Dun Il
,t..l ror sl2so,o on the Central National Bank
10, pavuent % his Indebtedness Tie check was
,.r...n,c1 but Mr. Wman had not cent on de-
post there.
r,dre MARITIME in General Sessions issued
h.nrh warrant for the arrest Of MI. Ni"ah'
vhlcn was served b. Detective Scrgcanis Reilly
and Won GerIch,en They found him In MS
office Room so li2. on the sixth no'r of the
WASHINGTON Building. about $40 o'clock. lie
dld not secure any bonisnan. Norman =
walker. jr. his son-iu-law. accompanied MN
and the detectives to he neral Sessions Build
ing wher. he was arragned before Judge Mar
tine.
Are YOU represented by counsel?' the Judge
asked.
Il have been comforting with General Tracy
all afternoon" Mr.. Wiman said 'ani expect
to confer with him again In half an hour be-
ucye bail has been fixed at $4,000
Assistant Dlstrlcr-Attorucy Lindsay explained
that he had said that at least $4,000 Of bail
would be- asked. although the entire amount IN
volvcd was $500 0Oo The Judge said that he
would fix the bail at $4,000. and asked the
prisoner:
.Wnl YOU furnish bail tonight"
"Xo sir: don't intend 10 do IT," Mr.. Wiman
said dccisivcy.
Then you must go to the Tombs."
And 50 Mr. Wiman did 20 10 the Tombs Cen
eral Tracy saw him there.
STATEMENT or MIR. DrTs COUNSEL
The complaint against Wiman first sub
njitcd To trct-Attorney Fellows by De Ian
cey Nicoll counsel Of X. q. Dun & Co.. on Feb
ruarv l5 when the following brief OF the case
was submitted:
Sir: beg to submit 70 you FOR official action this
conn nlaint of the firm Of f. c. Dun q CO. against
Era stus Wlman for the crime OF forgery ana ask
that YOU send the same 10 the present Grand Jury.
charges Tor the purpose Of satisfying myself
whether any explanation or det"nr" of then coun
be- made. and ! think you wul agrc" with me tnat
clearer cases more easily proved by reputable
Witnesses have rarely, II ever. been submitted TO
the authorities. The association known as the
firm OF r. o. Dun n Co.. with which tn" defendant
Wlman was connected during the period covering
ihe act complained Of was formed on January
J. 1889 but Wiman had Tor many years prior 10
that date business relations Win Mr.. Dun W iman
was not partner Of Mr.. Dun in the usual sense.
tile interest In the property or goot will of the
business profits thereof For while 1t was agreed
that pc should receive amounts or sums equal 10
certain per cent Of the profits. 1t was expressly
provided in the articles referred 70 that such sum
should be paid to him only by NJ. Dun AZ salary
for faithful services rendered. and that the amour.
OF profit should only afford the basis OF determin-
Ing the amour. OF his salary.
1t was also provided In the articles Of associa-
tion that be should not employ the name OF Il. G.
Dun s. Co for any purpose except the regular
AMI proper business Of the said mercantile agency.
and that he should not us" tho said name I'm max
INK. signing. drawing inlorsing any note. bill Of
exchange draft or other obligation. except only
Endorsements OF such papers for the purpose Of
deposit collection for the account OF the asso-
ciatiOn He also had the right to sign firm checks
for firm purposes only.
MIR. WIMAN SALARlDD MANAGER.
All OF Mr. Wlmans relations to Mr. Dun. who
was the sole owner OF the business. its assets and
property OF every description good will and profits
were expressed in these papers Wiman was sal
aricd manager for Mr. Dun. with such powers only
ms the compact gave him. with the added power
to draw checks. The property Of Il. G. Dun G.
Co was not his property in any sense. the moneys
of r. c. Dun & CO. were not his moneys and the
profits were not his profits. And yet. by various
acts OF embezzlement through misrepresentation
concealments breaches OF his agreement, misuse OF
the powers cOnided TO him and gross uslirpation OF
powers with which he not trusted, he
ceeded during the years 1855 1890 1891 1897 and up
To February. 1888 in stealing from Mr Dun the
enormous sum OF s229OlS 30. That sum he owes to
Mr.. Dun to-day
That In view OF his relation to the property of
Mr.. Dun. which Wiman helped TO manage under
the name OF X. G.. Dun CO., he is guilty OF the
Cnu e..sn ar