The sun., 1898-12-17

(
juss iasued S6, 900 worth of checkson The
First National Bank Of Dover. and that
Cuthbert & Co. had ect % goo OF money
from him; ell Of which checks, according
to the testimony OF the witness, had
been paid by the witness out OF the funds
Of The First National Bank of Dover in
the way already stated; that the checks
drawn by the defendant to William
Anderson mentioned in the consoli-
dated indictment, as it now stands.
were drawn and delivered by the
defendant with the understanding
"that they should not be charged
to his account, that he should not have
them to pay" that the bank did not
know anything about that arran:ement;
that the defendant knew at the time OF
the giving Of the Anderson checks that
the witness was in default to The First
National Bank Of Dover; that during the
time the witness was carrying the de-
fendant in the manner as above de-
scribed, with the moneys OF The First
National Bank of Dover, the defendant
knew that he, William N. Boggs, was
CARRYING others in like manner, includ.
ing Thomas s. Clark, Harry F. Ford and
William E. Cotter; that the witness since
the time when it was expected that an
examination OF his accounts would oc-
cur in October, 1895, has discussed with
the defendant prospective examinations
OF the books of The First National Bank
Of Dover, and called the attention OF the
defendant to the condition OF the de-
fendant's matters prior to such examina-
tion, telling him that 1--WE we're carrying
so much stuff we must try to li9uidate
in some way, or get it In q different
shape to bridge over the PERIOD" that
in one instance on the occasion OF the
approach OF o prospective examination
he handed in draft which the witness
succeeded in having credited in the de.
fendant's pass book and in the defend
ants account on the individual ledger Of
The First National Bank OF Dover; that
this was in the latter part of June, 1885,;
that this draft for $3.50 came back un-
paid on July 8, 1896; that the cashier was
astounded to see the draft come back
after the witness had assured him that it
was q good draft, that for the purpose Of
helping to pay the draft of $3.50, there
was another draft of $1,033.18 deposited
July 8, 1895, in The First National Bank
of Dover which afterwards came back
protested sometime early in August, 1896;
that shortly after the return OF the last
mentioned draft protested another draft
was deposited in The First National
Bank of Dover. for the sum Of 81 1864 0,
which draft also came back protested,
August Is, 1896, and was paid out OF the
funds Of the bank and carried until about
September 25, 1896, when it was charged
to the defendants account.
The defendant testified, among Other
things, to the effect that he had known
William N. Boggs since 1881, 1882 OF
1888. about the time he became clerk ir
The First National Bank of Dover; that
the defendant became counsel for Will
liam N. Boggs in 1893 or 1894, and at the
time OF the confession by William N
Boggs of his defalcation did not know
that William N. Boggs had any othel
counsel than him, the defendant; that
the defendant was never intimate witt
William N. Boggs in social way
neither of them ever visiting the house
of the other; that the defendant frs
learned of the defalcation of William N
Boggs to The First National Bank O
Dover, in November, 1894, shortly afte
the general election; that at that timt
William N. Boggs came to the defend
ants house ut night and told the defend
ant that he, William N. Boggs, was il
trouble with the bank; that he, the de
fendant, was astonished and Mortified a
the statement OF William N. Boggs, ant
considered it a very serious matter; tina
the interview did not last more than tel
or fifteen minutes; that he, the defend
ant, advised William N. Boggs to see hi
relations and friends and make tile mat
ter good before it gained publicity; tina
William N. Boggs did not mention the
amount of his defalcation nor the way il
which it was consummated; that the de
fendant did not ask William N. Bogg
anything about the particulars of the de
falcation; that he, the defendant, did no
ask William N. Boggs what he had II
make good his defalcation, nor how h,
could make it good: that he, the defend
ant got rid of William n. Boggs a
quickly as he could; that at this inter
view neither the name OF Thoma
S. Clark, or Ezekiel T. Cooper, or Harr!
f. Ford or any other person, was men
toned in connection with his, William N
Boggs' defalcation; that as time went OF
after the above mentioned interview the
relations of the defendant with William
N. Boggs grew more intimate in . bust
ness rather than in social way; that a
' no time after this interview did William
N. Boggs make to the defendant an.
reference to the defalcation until abou
a week before his flight from Dover
that the defendant saw William N. Bogg
almost daily when the defendant was q
home, and never asked William N
. Boggs whether he had seen his friend
. and relations and arranged this defalca
tion, which William N. Boggs had Con
fessed to the defendant as above stated
that the defendant took no further inter
! est in the matter of such defalcation AM
never asked William N. Boggs anythin
about it; that in 1894, when, according
to the testimony of the defendant, Viii
liam N. Boggs confessed his defalcatio
} to him, the defendant had no knowledg
of William N. Bogg's resources; that i
, the fall of 1895 William N. Boggs spok
to the defendant, about the troubles witt
the directors of the bank because of hi
, playing cards; that William N. Bogg
told the defendant that he had satisie
, the directors that he would quit playin
/ cards and that he had seen Mr.. MASSEY