The herald., 1897-01-16
LARRABEE GOES FREE.
Lucky for Him That He Worked on
Commission.

George Larrabee, charged with en-
bezzling sl40 the property Of Forbes
& Son. general agents for the Mutual
Life Insurance company, is again free
man, but he had close shave. At the
opening of court yesterday morning in
department one, counsel for the defend
ant moved the court to instruct the
jury to render verdict of acquittal, and
the motion was argued until late in the
afternoon by counsel for the defense and
the prosecution, the court being per-
picked over some particular points bear
ing on the case. 1t was argued by the
defense that Larrabee, the insurance
agent, was only bailee for Mrs. Sever
ance. who had made application for a
$4,000 policy and had given him $40 to
pay the premium on the same at the
rate she and the agent had agreed
upon. which was less than the rate
usually charged for risks on women.
The policy was not written It the rate
she had expected, ard she would not
accept it. The money was not earned
by the company nor by Forbes & Son.
was not paid to Forbes & Son. and con-
sequertly was not their property. Coun-
sci read an authority to show that an
agent working on commission is not
guilty of embezzlement if he appropri-
ates a sum of money of which he owns
a share as his commission. Mr.. Forbes
had advanced to defendant $500 which
was to be repaid out of commissions
earned by LARA bee, but this transac
tion was a private one and does not
prove that the money appropriated by
Larrabee was the property of Forbes.
The defense claimed to prove joint
ownership in the money. Under the
terms of Larrabee's employment he was
entitled to 60 per cent commission on
the amount of premiums he collected.
If LARA bee embezZlsd anything he en-
bezzled only the difference between the
Go per cent which was his own and the
50 per cent which was not, and 35 per
cent of s140 is s49. which would not con-
stitute case within the jurisdiction of
the superior court. 1t was contended
by the defense that Larrabee was in fact
the agent for the Mutual Life Insurance
company, and not for Forbes & Son;
that he received the money of Mrs. Sew
erance contingent upon his securing the
policy on her terms, and that, failing in
the attempt, he did not owe the amount
to the company, but to Mrs. Severance.
The principal point depended on by the
defense was the fact that Larrabee was
working on commission. and had right
full claim on 65 per cent of the sum he
collected.
To this the prosecution replied that
according to the evidence of Mr.. Forbes
the defendant Larrabee had no right to
deduct his own commission from the
amount of his remittance, but was re-
quired to remit the gross amount. and
the commission would be checked back to
him. This, it was cOntended, showed
that Larrabee had no claim upon any
portion of the $40 until it had been ac-
cepted by the company as payment for
the premium on the policy.
Mr.. Shankland and Deputy District
Attorney Shankland tried hard to con-
vince the court that LARA bee was work.
ing for Forbes & Son, who were respon-
sible for his acts, both to the company
and to the insurers, and that he has
TO right to any portion of the money
he collected until it had been earned
by the acceptance of the policy and the
risk.
The arguments, with frequent queries
by the court, continued to the afternoon.
The court was convinced that there was
10 case against George Larrabee, and
he instructed the jury to acquit the de-
fendant which was forthwith done.
The audience broke into applause, but
the frown of the judge and of Deputy
Sheriff Marsh suppressed the demon
stration that was intended to show SYM
pathy for the defendant.