Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-07-20

the latters arrest he did not feel In
clined to do so. He first went TO his
father-in-law's place. and from there he
went to see Mr.. Haw, his counsel, TO as
| certain n he could be compelled to testify.
/ The latter advised him to return home
and hold himself In readiness for further
! developments, which he did.
Mr. Haw, counsel OF the accused. here
made a statement as TO Terrys visit. and
said that he had told him that Mr.. Tom
| linson, whom he only knew 10 be a po-
| lice officer OF the city Of Richmond. had
no RICH; to summon witnesses in King
William county. Since then he had learn
ed. however that Tomlinson was also
State officer. Subsequently he told Jus
tice Crutchfeld. as well as others. that
his client would come to Richmond at
any time when he was wanted
Mr. Terry also told the Court when
questioned by the Commemorative At
| torney, that he never had suspicion as
| TO any irregularity when warrants issued
! from different counties were handed TO
/ him. and he displayed ignorance as to the
geographical location Of different coun-
| ties. He stated that he could not tell
| where Gloucester, Nansemond. and Mont
| gomery counties were situated. and the
only counties he knew anything about
/ were King William. New Kent. Hanover,
and the city Of Richmond. When he was
arrested By DeputySheriH Willroy he
was asked a good many questions. and IN
/ order 10 get rid OF him told the officer
that he had not received the warrants
| from Taylor. but had bought them. The
accused denied most positively that he
ever endorsed any OF the papers shown
him. The only endorsements which he
did make were on checks, and then he
only signed his own name.
KNEW HIS HANDWRITING.
Mr. 6. G. Wallace cashier OF the Citi-
zens' Bank. said he was well acquainted
with Terry's signature. and recognized
| the endorsement upon a check shown to
| him by counsel for the defence as that
OF Terry one Of the forged warrants
| was shown to Mr Wallace, who stated
that no saw no resemblance between the
endorsement thereon and the writing Of
| Terry. Cross-exainined. Mr.. Wallace gave
II as his opinion that the signatures pur-
portlng 10 be those OF j. III. Pemberton.
]. II. Wilson. ]. X. Lewis. and J. Hoff-
! man. which appeared on certain OF the
forged warrants, were written by one
and the same person. He said II wa-
impossible to charge the characteristics
of Handwriting, however much one might
change the form OF the characters. and
admitted resemblance in the charac-
and those of Mr.. Terry. though IT would
be impossible for him TO swear that the
endorsements We're written by him.
Deputy-Sherlff Willroy. Of King Will
liam. said he had been acquainted with
Mr. Terry for six years. Terry came to
him shortly after witness was given di-
rections to arrest him. and said he CTerry)
had heard that he tWillroy) had a war
rant for him, and wished to know whether
cum s.fsfsrF
Witness told him It was a warrant. and
mentioned the nature Of the charges.
Mr.. Terry admitted that he had handled
two of the warrants, and said he
did not get them from Taylor but pur-
chased them at a discount, adding that
II the Auditor did not know they were
foiyies how the was he CTerry)
TO know IT, When witness met the ac-
cused some days later, Terry asked him
whether he had made any statement 10
him on the day Of his arrest, and upon
being told the nature Of his admissions.
first of all denied It, and then said that
he remembered having made such a
statement when under the influence Of
liquor. and asked witness to write down
for him the nature Of the evidence he
would give in court. Witness said he
did not think Mr.. Terry was drunk at the
time he made the statement
Cross-examined. Mr.. Willroy stated that
he had always been on good terms with
Terry; that when he arrested him he
had no warrant. but had seen one in the
possession OF Sergeant Tomlinson. He
said he regretted the arrest Of Terry.
with whom he hal q ways been on excel
lent terms. because he was near neigh
bor. He told officer Tomlinson that in
his belief Terry was guilty. for he had
recently shown such signs Of increasing
means as 20 buy his sugar and certain
other provisions I'm bulk.
HE CHARGED FOR A GUARD.
Questioned as 10 his bill OF costs for
making the arrest, Il was developed that
the deputy had charged for the services
OF guard, as well as for himself, ana
that he had no guard on that occasion
IL was further shown that the arrest was
DELAYED from Thursday night till Satur-
day afternoon. and that when the dep
uty acted he knew he was doing
so irregularly. not having any warrant
The name Of John Bowers. Jr, was used
I'm the bill of costs as the guard, but In
a Ietter-introduced as evdence-address-
ed TO Mr.. Terry, Mr.. Bowers declared
that he was surprised and annoyed that
his name should have been used, as ne
had no connection at all with the arrest.
MIR. Bowers TOOK lHc sldHu' anu oidt'"
that he had received Willroy and his
prisoner at his OBowers) home on Satur-
day night out OF friendship to Terry
and I'm order to keep him out OF the
station-house over Sunday. He said that
in conversation between Officers
Willroy and Tomlinson, which took
place in his presence, Willroy asked what
they should do about a guard, and Tom
linson replied. make John Bowers guard.
and don't pay him cent" He said he
received no money for the service he did
upon that occasion. and that further
he would receive none.
This concluded tn evidence and court
then adjourned until IL o'clock this morn