Evening journal., 1898-05-16

ledger? 1t is for you as reasonable men
to determine whether, under the crcum-
stances. the true balances In the defend
ants account with the bank are not dis
closed I'm that ledger. The balance In the
defendants account as shown by the indi-
vldual ledger, are as follows; A balance
Of sg97S continued unchaged from May Z,
of S99.7S inclusive, to May H. 1896; an over
draft of % cents ran from May II. 1896. to
May y. 1896, inclusive; the balance on
May 49, 1896. was Si96.7s: on May 13, 1885,
the sum Of s201.5O was withdrawn, leaving
an overdraft on that day of A72. This
overdraft continued unchanged from May
H. 1896, to June 10, 1896. inclusive. on June
H. 1896, there was a balance to the credit
sof the defendant Of Si92Oi.. on the next
following day S2Ol.4O was withdrawn, leav-
ing overdraft on that day of s9.39.
This overdraft was increased by a check
for Si.al on June 49, 1896. to Sob. on June
i5 1896. there was a deposit Of 81, leaving
ms the defendants balance on that day
q cents This balance Of p cents con-
tinued unchanged until September %, 1896,
inclusive On September "a, 1896. there was
a deposit OF Sl9673, and a withdrawal of
$500 leaving an overdrafft of 50. This over
draft Of 50 continued unchanged until oct.
1. 1896, inclusive. on October 2, 1886. there
was a deposit Of $500. and on the same
day a withdrawal OF $780, leaving. after
allowing for the Overdraft Of S3, ball
ance due the defendant OF S3l7, which
balance continued unchanged until Octo-
ber 3, 1896. On that day there was a de-
poslt Of s33. and a withdrawal Of $3.50
leaving no balance either way. From this
date no balance appears either way until
December 10, 1896, on which day there was
90 rtsIsN 4ll ta.A N. hf fu
credit until the next day when the whole
amount was withdrawn, leaving no bal
ance either way until December "a, 1876,
when deposits were made amounting to
500. and on the same day the amount Of
both deposits was withdrawn, leaving no
balance either way.
The testimony OF Boggs which incrimin-
ated Cooper was gone over at length in
addition to other evidence, and the main
question In the case was stated to be
whether "the defendant with an intent
to injure and defraud the First National
Bank Of Dover knowingly and wi. =
aided or abetted William n. BOggs In d
complishing that result.
Judge Bradford concluded as follows:
The guilt OF innocence OF the defendant
is to be determined by you as intelligent
and conscientious men upon the evidence
|
A grave and solemn responsibility rests
upon you. No public clamor, no senti-
ment OF hostility or sympathy no con-
sideration OF consequences which may re-
suit from your verdict, should be permit
ted In any manner to influence your de
liberations or control your verdict. II
upon all the evidence in the case, includ
ing that relating to good reputation fol
honesty and integrity, you are not salts
fed beyond a reasonable doubt OF the
guilt OF the defendant you should acqui
him. But II upon all the evidence in th'
case you are satisfied beyond a reason
able doubt that the defendant is guilty
in manner and form as he stands indict
ed you should return a verdict OF guilty
II you shall find a verdict OF guilty it MAJ
be a general verdict OF guilty or a yer
dict OF guilty as to all or any OF thu
counts now in the indictment as the evi
dence shall warrant.