Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-01-30
Captain Howgate Faces the Jury
Once More.
JUROR RICHARDSON Was BETTER
Witnesses Testify Regarding the
Check for Telegraph Tolls.
EVID ENCE IN DETAIL

| of the opinion that Mr. Richardson, whose
| illness Yesterday caused an adjournment
| of the trial for the day, was able to per-
! form his duties. Judge McComas explain
| ed to Mr.. Richardson that 1t was exceed
| ingly important that he should continue
| in the case that there might be no fur
| ther delay in the trial. and the court as
sured the iuryman that the best Of care
would. be taken of him, and that it was
| incumbent upon him to take the best OF
| care of himself.
| As on the first day Of the trial. the
| court room was crowded, although Marshal
| Wilson directed his officers to prevent any
| overcrowding. Capt. Howgate, again In
| the best of health and spirits, apparently,
| was accompanied by his daughter, Miss
Ida Howgate, and he frequently sugses.esd
| Messrs A. S. Worthington and Iere NJ.
| Wilson.
| Cashier True.
District Attorney Birney called his
first witness for the day Cashier Edward
r. True of the United States treasurer's
| Office. He had been in the office, he said.
since 1854. Mr.. True explained the char
acter of the account books in the office,
| stating that there was a scratch book,
| daily settlement book Of the disbursing Of
| ficerS of the government, daily credit
| book and so on. In 1873, stated Mr.. True,
Capt. Howgate had two accounts, one as
! disburSing officer of the signal service OF
| fee and the other as Quartermaster.
| Question at Issue.
| Mr.. Brney was proceeding to ask Mr.
| True Just how checks of Capt Howgate
| were drawn and credited, when Mr. Worth
| ington objected. The line of inquiry, he
said, was a waste of useful time. The de-
fendant he asserted, had never denied and
would never deny that he was the dis
| bursting officer of the signal office, or that
| he had the amount tSl1.SoD alleged to nave
| been embezzled by him to his credit, or
| that he had drawn the check mentioned in
| the two indictments.
The sole questions at issue, said Mr.:
| Worthington, were who got the money?
| and who, if anybody. forged the name Of
| Treasurer Rochester of the Western Union
! Telegraph Company? Those questions.
! said Mr.. Worthington, could be answered
| in days time, and it was unnecessary,
| he claimed, to go about showing the yari-
| Gus operations of the Treasury Depart
ment.
district attorney to proceed the defense
noting an exception.
The Ledger Account.
Mr.. True then proceeded to show from
| the ledger accounts of the tressurers Of
flee that September 6, 1879, the day the
| amount of s11,Soo is alleged to have been
embezzled by Capt. Howgate, there was
40,41S.5O to the defendants credit in the
office, and at the close of the day S2S.-
2G1. .15.
The witness proceeded. against numerous
objections of the defense, and on cross
examination Mr. True stated to Mr.. Will
son that the checks paid showed, or should
show, the purpose for which they had
been drawn, otherwise the fund from
which 1t was to be paid could not be as
certained. The books of the treasurer's
office, explained the witness, did not show
when appropriations were exhausted. To
ascertain the state of appropriations at
any time it necessary to ask the war;
rant division of the Treasury Department.
The Account books.
The next witness called was VIM. ii.
Stearns Of the treasurers office, who stated
that he was the custodian of the account
books of the office, and then Mr. Stearns.
despite the objections of e'defense, show
ed from the books that at the close of bus
mess on September :, 1879, there were
$40, 1850. and that at the close of business
on tie following day there Were s2S.20l. 15
to Capt. HoWgate'S credit. Mir. St.ar1S
also stated that one of the checks drawn
by Capt Howgate and paid September 6,
1879 was one for s11,S00. Mr.. Stearns pro-
duced that check made payable to Trcas-
urer Rochester of the Western Union Tele-
graph Company, or order, for services.
II now introduce the check in evidence.
said the district attorney.
Wcrthington, but we admit its genuine
ness"
The check was then passed over to
the jury, and, after they had carefully eX-
amined it, Mr.. Birney announced that he
would next show by the witness and the
hooks that February IA, May 20 and Sep
tember 10, 1879, precisely similar tra!sac-
tions We're carried out by the defendant.
He would also show. said Mr.. Birney, all
other bills rendered by the Western Union
Telegraph Company. and the nature of the
services rendered: that is, explained Mr..
Birney, he expected to prove that the
checks drawn on the three mentioned dates
the defendant made the checks payable
here and to bearer, a course not observed
by him in drawing legitimate checks. He
also expected to prove, said MIR. Birney,
that on one occasion, at least, Capt How
gate received the amount Of the check In
person, and that it was deposited to the
credit of his (Howgate's) private bank ac-
count. Mr.. Birney stated, also, that no
part of the checks drawn on the three mem
toned dates Were ever received by the par
ties named in the checks
Ruling.
Mr. Worthington stoutiy protested
against the government being allowed to
show or attempting to show such things.
especially at such a time. Two Of the
dates, said Mr. Worthington, We're prior to
the dates alleged in the indictments, and
the other was subsequent. 1t was clearly
the intention of the district attorney TO in
f1uence the jury by endeavoring to show
other alleged wrongdoing. But, said Mr..
Worthington, until it was shown that Capt.
Howgate received the 1,Soo, similar trans
actions could not be shown.
Mr. Wilson also joined in the protest, and
Judge McComas finally held that the prose-
oution should first exhaust its affirmative
proof as to the particular transaction al
legged in the two indictments on which the
defendant was at present being tried.
Further Testimony.
Frederick W. Moffatt. paying teller Of
the United States treasurers Office for
many years, next testified. He identified
the signature of Capt Howgate to the
check for s11,s00. payable to the Western
Union Telegraph Company or bearer, but
said that he did not remember TO whom he
paid the check in question. Mr.. MoTatt
stated that he was in the habit Of paying
large checks to bearer, but thought that in
such cases he usually required dentifica-
ton of the parties receiving the money.
The check in question. the witness ex-
planned, bears no indorSer. He could not
say that he paid it to the defendant. In