The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-06-14
MIR. WlMAN TESTIFIES
WHAT HE DID AS MANAGER FOR
DUN'S MERCANTILE AGENCY.
Mr.. BOardman's Statement for the De-
Tense i'm the Celebrated Forgery
Case-RuIing Against Wiman.

prosecution in the case of EraStuS Wiman,
accused of forgery in the second degree,
was all in when the court Of Oyer and
Termine took it's noon recess. The wit
nesses examined to-day corroborated evil
dence submitted yesterday and no new
points Of consequence were scored. The
letter from Mr.. Wiman to Mr.. Dun, in
which full confession of the forgery of E.
W. Bullinger's name as indorser OF two
checks was offered in evidence, to which
the defense objected, on the ground that
it was procured on the promise Of indem-
nifty. 1t was admitted and counsel for Mr..
Wiman entered exceptions.
In stating the case for the defense Gen.
Tracy took the position that, as Mr.. Wi
man was a partner in the firm of r. G.
Dun & Co., his actions were strictly legal
Elf at the times somewhat roundabout"
General Tracy argued that each partner In
the firm of r. G. Dun & Cc., had the same
rights and powers as had the combined
firm.
Judge Ingraham ruled that 1t was inn
material whether Wiman was or was not a
partner of Dun, but that 1t was not en-
tirely clear that, as between themselves,
1t was not a partnership. BY the articles
of association all power Of Endorsement was
expressly withheld from the managers ex-
cept the power to indorse for deposit
checks, payable to the concern. In prac-
tice, Wiman had been allowed TO findorse
for other purposes, and to that extent the
articles were virtually modified. The act
of Wiman, however, SO far as shown, was
one which plainly brought ii under the pro-
visions of the statute relating to forgery,
and was as plainly an act which he had
no authority under the agreement to per-
form.
Mr.. Boardman then began his opening
address for the defense. claiming that Wi
man was the head and front of the firm of
r. G. DUN & CO. He conceded that wiman
signed BuHinger's name to the two checks
and deposited them to his own account. He
also conceded Wfman's Indebtedness to the
firm. The letter of confession was admitted
to show the relations of wiman toward
Dun. The concern made more than 81, 900
a day for Dun, who never bothered himself
about the affairs of the concern, but let
Mr.. Wiman do it all. Dun had little else
to do than fish for tarpons in Florida
waters in winter and pass the heated term
at his magnificent villa at N~arragansett
Pier, r. /. And all this time Wiman was
fortune. Then Mr.. Boardmap dilated upon
what he called the extraordinary charac-
ter of the prosecution in this case. Would
you take by the hand a mar like Dun, who
gives to the public authorities a paper so
sacred and confidential as this letter OF July
1, 1902 he asked. 1.-The prosecution of
Wlman dates back to the year 1866, when
ment of the New York office at the earnest
wish OF Dun. In order to make my mean
ing clear. it should be said that Mr.. Dun
is childless. Following the death of Mr..
NARROW, MIR. DIn's partner, Mr.. Douglass,
whose uncle. haG been one of the founders
OF our Int t So% fsRe 'the p pEeney OF t his uncle ena Gene ne
tiemen, that map Douglass was Wiman's
arch enemy from the very beginning. Dun
you know constant dripping Will wear away
the largest stone. Douglass's largest OPP
portunfty came when he was apprised OF
the two Bullinser checks. He was happy
Of oet the n4 frm." In Closing. Mr.. Boardman
said, with choked utterance, Il would rath-
er stand before this bar charged with all
than ,xtand in the shoes OF Dun
General Tracy then called the defendant
to tort tie sn stand Sl,e and d m asksa h an ns to ca ,sll the
story Of his life up to the present day. The
defendant began by giving a sketch Of his
1866 to take charge Of the New York branch,
at the earnest solicitation Of Mr.. Dun. Mr..
Wiman went on to describe how he sug-
gested the establishment Of the firms print
Ing establishment: how he bought enormous
supplies for that plant. and how soon there
after he was taken into the association. He
added that he had compiled the reference
and had created many new features. The
agency at that time was on the mercantile
spy system added Mr.. Wiman. But ]
abolished many Objectionable features and
raised the tone of the agency" During his
time as manager OF the agency the firms
$50, 900, then to 100000, to $4,000 and by
successive jumps to half a million. which
in round numbers was the net profit Of the
agency when he was dropped out of 1T.
Mr.. Wiman went on to say that from the
time of Mr.. Barlow's death, in 1880, Mr.
in the associations affairs. Mr.. Dun had
an equal interest with him in the Staten
island rapid transit scheme of 1880. Speak.
ing to Mr.. Dun of his overdrafts, witness
had told him that he owned at least
100000 worth of real estate on Staten
that as a trust held by him against any
moneys he might owe r. G. Dun & Co. 81
will add that at that time / owned more
real estate within ten miles of New York
city than any other man." Mr.. Wimar
said.
written by Mr.. Dun on Jan. II, 1893, in
which Dun states he has heard that Wimar
is drawing too heavily against his account
In this letter Dun restricts Wiman 10 $500
a month. The letter goes on to say that 1
has come to Dun's knowledge that he owl
the private affairs of the firm, and wind:
UP by stating that II would be glad Il
learn that your affairs are In better shape
than / imagine them to be-" After the
reading of this letter court was adjourned
until Tomorrow morning. The case viii
probably go to the jury tomorrow night.
NnDnII DADK DEDVyDU IUANC