The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1895-12-19

The defence here claimed that bill
of Indictment was fatally defective in
that the defendants were indicted for
obtaining a thing of value. to wit: Il
policy of insurance in the National
Life Association in the sum of $4,000
whereas there were, in fact, two poll
cies, one for 1000 and one for $4,000
The application asked for So 900 of
insurance, in two policies. The two
policies aggregating So 600 were issued
at the same time and upon the same
application.
Judge Graham in oyerruling defend
ants objection. said: ~ policy of in
surance is a thing of value. The
amount of the policy is simply a de
scriptive word The question is
whether this was thing Of value and
obtained by false pretense,"
The witness Simpson continued: Il
first saw these policies last year in
Mr.. Hassell's hands. He had asked
me before that if | would carry a poll
cy for Mrs, Arthur upon the life of
her husband. | told him no. | was
out of insurance and didn't want any
thing more to do with it. After that
he came TO me again and insisted on
it. / said, MIR. Hassell | don't want
anthing to do with it. | says l don't
like it and don't want anything to do
with it, He came to me n second
time. | told him then that may be
my son would help me carry it. |
wrote to my son at Portsmouth. He
wrote back to do as / pleased. Hassell
asked me what my son said and / told
him. After that Mr.. Hassell brought
me the policy for SO 900 and the trans
fer OF the policy from Mrs Arthur to
me, signed before John Forlaw, n. p,
and a power of attorney from Mrs.
Arthur. | took it and paid Hassell
the premium about SIG. Mr.. Hassell
told me Mr.. Wade had the 81 900 policy
in some company on Chas. Arthur"
''When was the next time you saw
these policies -
When Mrs. Arthur entered suit a
gainst the company she gave me the
papers to carry to Mr.. Thomas, her
attorney. also attorney for Mr.. Wade
and myself. / carried both policies to
Mr.. Thomas. Hassell didn't tell me
what interest Wade had in his policy
1t Was two months from the time Has
sell first came to me to take the poll
cies before ! took them.
II never saw Mrs. Arthur or Chas.
Arthur about this policy before | took
it. ! saw Mrs. Arthur one day after
her husband died. / did not speak 10
Mrs. Arthur before the transfer was
made TO me. There is civil suit now
pending on each of these policies
brought by Mrs. Arthur.
The transfer was then read to the
jury Ii conveyed to J.. L. and
Clarence Simpson nine-tenths of the
Arthur in policy No. 81 ,177 in National
Life Association, upon the life of her
husband, Chas. Arthur and was wit
messed by j. c. Delamar (who has Just
been convicted of conspiracy
The power of attorney from Mrs.
Arthur to the Simpsons was likewise
witnessed by Delamar 1t gave Simp-
son power to make out death proofs
on her husband when he died and to
sue for and collect the $4,000 from the
company and was irrevocable.
These two papers were made March
20, 1895. The insuratue was applied
for March &, 1894.
The other witnesses on the stand
were 7. y, liippey and La Fayette Me
Cullen
Judge Grahams charge was very
carefully delivered.
The defense offered no evidence.
Clark and Abernethy and GuiOn spoke
for the defense. Allen and Simmons
for the State
About o'clock the jury returned
the usual verdict guilty as to both,