Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-09-03
THE ARLINGTON CASE
Examination of Post Office Inspector
on Charge of Embezzlement.
AMOUNT INVOLVED PLACED At $4,000
Counsel for Defense Alleges At
tempt to Condemn by Innuerdo.
TIL E EVIDENCE ADDU CED


last week on the complaint cf the Post
| Office Department authorities, who charged
| him with the enbe zz!ement of about s., 900
government funds while serving an in
| spector of the department, given
| preliminary hearing before United States
Commissioner Mills yesterday afternoon.
The hearing was not concluded however,
being continued until this afternoon.
The accused man was represented by At
| torney a. A. Lipscomb Assistant District
Attorney Hugh T. Taggart appearing on be-
half of the government.
Post Office Inspector Smith was TIE first
| witness, explaining the duties performed
| by the defendant and stating that large
sums OF money passed through his hands
He said that Arlington had received S.
ilJD from a West Virginia postmaster in
August of last year, OF which about 81 :,.9
| was paid over by him at the time and $50
| or more two or three months later. Some
500 was received by Mr.. Arlington said
| the witness, in last February, which was
| cot turned over. II was claimed, until last
| July, after the accused had been removed
IRON the position of inspector.
Counscrs Explanation.
In his cross-examination of Inspector
Smith. Mr.. L!pscoInb endeavored to show
| that pest office Inspector is obliged from
| the very necessity of things to keep a pri-
| plain that IN this way the accounts became
| confused, Mr.. Arlington having no inter
ton of defraud.ng the government and
belnS as much surprised anyone else to
learn that he was charged with embezZle-
ment.
Mr. George d. Hamlet who succeeded to
the position held by Mr. Arlington next
testified that when he took charge of the
Office vacated by the defendant he was
assured by him that there remained roth
| ing due the
ing over to witness. But 1t was found so
Mr. Hamlet said, that about S3egp) was
unaccounted for, in connection with post
| offices in Virginia, West Virginia Marviard
ami North Carolina. As apparent short
! ages were found the accused would he
notified. whereupon he would make good
the amount charged against him, the last
payment beng made the I'd of last month.
40 Actual Shortage.
On cross-examination, Mr.. Lioscomb
showed ny the witress that the greater part
| of the alleged shortage was on current
cases, and Mr.. LiDscomb co-tented that
| his client had the money but a few days,
intending TO turn it over at the earliest
| practicable time. Mr.. L.pscomb also
| claimed that it will be shown that the gov
| erninent Is Indebted to the accused ra ther
than that there is any shortage and that
| II was simply matter of difference in
pohucs ara IN the Keeping of accounts
hAeSumcu.
The case was continued before United
States Commissioner Samuel c. Mills at /
o'clock this afternoon, Mr. Hugh T. Tag
| g TT appearing for the government and
Messrs. Andrew Lipscomb ard Charles D.
Turner for the accused.
The prosecution continued the first wit
| ness called being Harry Chapman a clerk
| in the inspectors office of the Post Oftce
department. Mr. Chapman testified that
ne ne mad been SO employed during Mr.. Ar
r1nStons incumbency. Witness made up
every month report of all cases received
ard closed, and wnen Mr.. Hamlet took the
once witness mace up Il statement Of the
| ceipt to be signed by Mr.. Arlington anG
Mr. Hamlet when the papers in the office
/ were turned over to the latter.
Several very lively tits occurred over the
examination CT the witness. Mr. Lips
comb objected to Mr.. Taggart's questions
Gle after another. He declared that the
prosecution was attempting to try the ac-
| cUsed by innuendo. The objections were
| CVerruled.
Hamlet Refused to Sign,
Witness said Mr.. Hamlet refused to sign
| the receipt. Later on, July 10, Mr.. AIRING
ten came To witness and handed him
s"4S.2o which he said had been overlooked
| ir settling case. MIR. Arlington Oh this
| occasion said this payment squared his az
| count entirely. Mr.. Arringtcn subseouent-
! ly, July n, turned over $464 .53 on account
| OF z Virginia case; July % Mr.. Arlington
| turned over money in three cases amoun.-
! ing in all TO about SLIGO. July 81 he turned
| IN $-o9l9. This covered the case in Man
nlngton, w. Va, ard another smaller case
The money in the case of Belvederc N.
C., under consideration was included n
| the payment of July 81 No money from
these payments.
When witness looked Up the Halifax case
re s2lu thefe was nothing of 1t, except
the jacket. WItress examined the case be-
cause of n report of inspector Gregory
| Upoa acrosS-exanination by Mr. Lipscomb
Mr. Chapman testified that when Mr. Ar
ringtoa turned over the amounts he had
recited On direct examination, he CARING
tcn) was still a bonded officer of the Post
| Office Department. Witness did moi know
when Arlington received the money
Mr.. Lipscomb-"They are evidently try
| ing to show that embezzlenaent consists in
| turning In money to the proper custodian"
| witness continuing, in reply to the at
| torney's questions, admitted that the
! amounts turned in as recited might have
| heen received only short time before he
| turned them over by Mr.. Arlington. bur
old not think they had been received the
| Cay before.
| Takes Time to Consider
When asked if he ever had a conversa-
tion with Inspector Hamlet about the Hail.
fax case. where an alleged shortage oc-
Cured, and if he (witness) had suggested
| to MIR. Hamlet that be should make demand
| On Mr.. Arlington for the amount or make
| II ention of it to him, Mr. Chapman thought
( a very long time and finally said:
Il think did say something about it,"
| will you kindly tell Us what Mr. Hamlet
| said in repy?" asked Mr.. Lipscomh
| Witness pondered again for a period and
then replied that he didn't think he could
| remember.
| On redirect examination witness said he
| kept The cash book, but Mr. Arlington re-
| oeived all the money while inspector in
| charge Mr. Arlington would make a note
| en- a slip Of paper that such an amount of
| money had been received in q certain case
and witness would record 1t in the cash
book.
| 1t was very difficult to find out from the
witness just what the cash book was in
tended for. 1t developed finally that no
| entries were made unless Mr. Arlington
gave witness slip. Usually the slip was
| given when money received had been de-
! posted in the treasury. If Mr.. Arlington
| deposited money received to his own ac-
| count. the cash book would not show it.
Inspector Gregory TestiGes.
The next witness was Post Office IN
spector Gregory. His duties were In Vir-