Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1898-06-30
TH0S. S. CLARK CONVICTED
Found Guilty Of Five Counts Of the
Indictment.
THE ACCUSED SEEMED SURPRISED
Attorney Biggs' Final Appeal
for Clark.
vANDEGRIFTSpOWERFUL ARRANGEMENT

The trial OF Thomas S. Clgrs, charged
with aiding and ahotting William n.
Bogge, tho defaulting teller of the First
National Bank, Dover, was resumed 10
the United States district Court yes
terday afternoon week.
District Attorney NHndegrift began
his opening address at 3 10 o'clock, and |
continued for 80 minutes. Referring |
to the long time tho case had consumed, |
be said it WAC one which should he |
presented as completely as tho facts |
warranted. He requested that the evil |
dence he given the most careful con
bideration, and explained that owing |
20 the statute OF limitation, the dc
PENDANT could not be convicted of the
crimes which the indictment charged
him with having committed previous
to April 25th, 1895.
So fur as Boggs wac concerned, Mr..
Vandegrift said he was willing to lot
Boggs' record on the witness stand
Epoak for itself; he was willing TO put
Boggs' record on tho witness stand
alongside Of the defendant's. He stated
that, when he came into court, be was
determined that BOggs' testimony
should he corrobUrated, and claimed
that he had corrUborated Boggs testi
mony. lilo asserted that he had taken
specific checks aud traced them step by
step from inception to payment, and by
books had showed that they were paid
with money which did not belong to
the defendant.
Mr.. vandegrift said he would await
with interest the defence respecting
the two $50 checks; tho defence had
offered no testimony regarding them.
He spoke of the two $3.50 checks, and
efufa1 hne hn tlnfanna onntanAa1 that
for one Of them the defcndanV had
given draft, but Mr.. Vandegrift
Cuimed that Clark had given it upon
those who would not honor it, remind
ing the jury that he had produced from
Il. u. Cuthbert & 70. q letter showing
that Clark did not have with them
money to meet the draft
Abiding TO the testimony given by
Senator kenney and Mesars. Clark.
Butler and Cotter, Mr.. Vandegrifr said
they had been brought to Gloss the
prison doors against Clark; aud, he re-
marked, they will keep on coming TO
court, and each time they come there
will be one less of them.
Mr.. Vaudegrift reviewed the 81, 900
bond transaction and reminded the
jury that Clark had said most of the
bond was gambling debt and also had
record Of gambling debts. The district
attorney directed attention to the fact
that Boggs had testified from this bouk.
anu that it showed that in July, 1896
an Indebtedness of $3.50 had been paid
by Clark and the last entry showed that
CLARK owed Boggs s32. Mr.. Vands-
grift said the defence had been given
notice 10 produce the So check, and
they had replied that they did not have
it, but, he remarked. the government,
fortunately, had obtained copy of it.
He said tho prison doors had closed
upon Boggs, and Boggs had nothing to
gain by swearing falsely. II the defend.
ant were innocent, he continued, CLARK
could have proved his innocence by
producing letters and checks delivered
10 him on October 18th, 1897. Or
April 9th, 1897, three days before h,
gave the bono, Clark had his bank &C
count balanced, and on April 2Gth, 1897
II days after giving the bond, he hat
his account balanced again. II the bonr
transaction we're an honest affair, VIII,
did Clark have settlement with tn
bank; why would not hin checks nav
come through the hankY
If only one of the $50 items had beel
proved, Mr. Vandegrift said no woult
nsk for verdict Of guilty, because i
was only one of hundreds OF transac
tions the defendant had under the ar
rangement with BOggs. He could no
see what the defence would be, unlos
it would lie, as Mr.. Biggs had init
mated while reading from Iowa "a la,
book, that Boggs, because he ha
pleaded guilty, was not worthy OF be
lief Mr.. Vandegrift claimed that b
had met this all along the line wit
documentary proof obtained long be
fore Boggs expected to come TO court
Twill you believe the man who ia try
ing to right wrong, or will you bt
lieve the man who is trying TO escaE
punishment for wrong?h said Mi
Vundegrift in conclusion.
Thursday morning District A ttorne
Vandegrift rssumed his address to til
jury. He called the attention of the jul
to the small bond of $3.50, which wi
signed by Thomas S. Clark. Mr.. Var
degrift held that ClarK's excuse II
signing the bond that Boggs had askq
him to do so was not a reasonab
excuse. He held that although it wi
alleged that the bond renresentt
Charles II. Buffers checks, it evident
was an obligation of Clark's lie callt
attention to the two clips for S2
showing a deposit of December lit
1898, and said by referring to tine bar
books BoggB' statement regarding Il
transaction would he borne out,
claimed that all of Bogga' testimo
was borne out By documentary evden
and asked the jury to consider au
evidence. He also spoke Of the hor
brooklyn, reviewing the testimony co
corning IT. Relative to the telegram
May 10th, 1896, which was 81 much
evidence yesterday, be said he ne,
heard of it until it was produced
the defence. Neither had no heard
the Dover banks connection with I
First National Bank of Dover, b
claimed that the telegram was not Il
lowed up by the defence and what "
brought out in connection with it "
not inconsistent with the evidsr
which had bean induced by the prn
cution. Relative to the draft on Cut
bert ~ Co. for $3.50, he said the oilic,
OF tile bank had testified that ella
had no credit there aud he could I
have overdrawn his account there,
cept by an arrangement with Roy,
unknown to the bank officers. 4
telegram relating to the draft, no &C
tlnued, confirmed what Boggs bad 81
about protesting the souond check
part. Butler and Clark said Bog
went to Clark's Office and told them
hold on to the Bay State Gas stoc
that it would 90 to 80, but Mr.. Vanc
grit said the protest did not look as
Boggs had given any such advice. I
testimony OF Boggs relative TO the T.