The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1895-12-20
CASHIER cuNNIxGHAMs CASE.
The Omciars Fate in the Hands OF
the Jury.


the Jury.
Brunswick, Ca. Dec. 19.-No case be
fore Glynn's court has attracted as much
interest this term as that Of the state
vs. F. p. Cunningham. the eX-cashier or
the defunct Brunswick State Bank. an in
stitution which failed here in 1882 ana
swallowed up thousands of dollars Of
small depositors' money. besides causing
heavy losses TO several large concerns
The history of the case and trial. the re-
columns, form interesting reading for the
many who were sWamFeQ i'm the wreck
and others who suffered badly. The
states case was based on
the grounds that the cashier, with a
knowledge OF the bank insolvency, re-
ceived deposits, and failed 20 return The
money within three days after the de-
mand for IT had been made The indlct-
ment was under section Of the code max
ing such offense felony, with punls hment
ranging from one TO ten years iu the
penitentary. DunWoody 8, Atkinson rep
resented the defense and Solicitor Brant-
ley the state. The defense entered gem
eral denial. after which the state proceed
ed TO introduce testimony.
Director Coney swore that the defend
ant was cashier at the time of the bank 8
failure; that ne was supposed 70
bank was now in the hands Of a re-
ceiver, but was not placed in receivers
hands until after doors closed.
Deposit0r NerOnki testified that he car
ried 500 In silver 10 the bank to exchange
for paper. The cashier took il and told
him to return the next day. He returned
as requested but the defendant told him
they had no paper money yet, but not
10 be uneasy, they were as sofia as "a
rock His 500 had been i'm the meantime
entered as a deposit He did not get Il
and went away. Next day the bank
closed. The defendant came TO
his store the next day and he
said to him. What am / going to
do? You've got my money; I can't pay
my bills; ! am ruined; you make me
crazy
the bank Is all right; Wen be open again
in couple of days. but 1 VIII get you up
bills"
On cross examination the witness stated
that he did not intend to deposit the 500;
he only wanted change for it.
Others swore substantially to having
deposited after receiving positive assur
ances from the defendant that the bank
was safe
After ali the evidence was submitted the
accused made his statement, which was
in substance that he did not deem the
hank insOlYent when the various deposits
We're received. That he had placed con-
fdenee in superior officer now dead
which had been misplaced; that he had
intimate friends whom he could nave warn
ed to withdraw their money, but did not
do so thinking the institution solvent. lie
dQllllttu some OF the testimony Uul Qe-
MED the most material. The president took
large amount of notes to New York, but
failed to secure money on them. I GER
tairly plead not guilty. l have begun life
again on the lowest round to build myself
up want to change this ill-feeling
against me, and hope to succeed" A re-
quest from the solicitor to ask the defend-
ant a question being denied Attorney At
kinson began the argument for the de-
Tense.
He argued that the defendant was not
aware Of the banks insolvency, dwelling
at length on the law of reasonable doubt.
Further, that with more paper in bank
than its debts amounted to no man could
safely argue that defendant knew the
bank to be insolvent.
Solicitor Brantley followed for the state
and his effort has been characterized as
the best ever delivered in a Glynn county
o9uro room conclusions s case F T2s pd fSs
the bank was insolvent when
the deposits were received; second, that
the defendant knew it to be so. He term
ed the defense an ambush Of techni-
cality." "A cashier" he said, lis a trus-
tee. The stockholders trust him and there
fore the people trust him. The betrayal
of that trust is a crime" He pointed to
the evidence to show that there was no
run on the bank, but instead, during the
week preceding its failure, the deposits
exceeded the Withdrawals by $1,000 That
the bank was then in a rotten condition
and the cashier knew it. Why did he not
know the condition of this bank" con-
pleading incapacity. imbecility or idiocy?
IT was his business TO know and he did
know" In his arraignment the solicitor
was very severe, saying: He comes here,
gentlemen claiming to be a victim of
misplaced confidence. He goes down to
the grave and places an unproven stigma
upon the memory of the dead
Attorney Dunwoody began the closing
argument for the defense by stating, Il
viii not discuss the dead except in JUS
tice to the living" Following this he de-
livered an eloquent and touching word
the defendant waiting by their fireside in
a distant city for tidings from their be-
loved boy now on trial before that court
and jury. From this he took up the evil
dence as submitted and argued that the
defendants best Judgment told him the
bank was solvent when he re-
ceived the deposits and his judgment
was worth as much as any mans He
denied that the defendant was guilty of
a criminal act. and asked the jury TO
dict against him. His attacks on the wit
nesses We're sarcastic. and he then re-
ferred to the banks obligations stating
that the reason more were not now paid
was on account of receiverships' expenses.
This brought Judge SWeats gavel down
his honor stated That does not bear on
the case Counsel will refrain from any
comments on that matter"
The counseis concluding remarks We're
eloquent and, fervid. being a remarkably
strong appeal for the defendant and sym
pathies of the jury. In his charge Judge
Sweat was very impartial but followed
the letter of the law strictly, giving the
case to the jury in a comprehensive man
ner.
AT a late hour tonight the jury was
still out.