Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1898-05-19

stand aud, Going to whery Chopper was
seated. matched piece q cloth and
Cnoper's coat Mr.. Bird raised the
laugh in cou,t. MIR. VHudegrift con
tinued, by RsEing the wituesa whether
Bogga' suit hai ever been paid for.
Mr.. Vandegrift asserted that he merely
summoned Carr for the purpose OF tost-
ing ths truth Of Iiogrs' statument that
no and Cooper were in Philadelphia on
a certain date, on tho occasion when,
according to Boegs' testimony, Iioggs
gave Cooper $1,000 hill
In conclusion, Mr. Vandegrift said
RI you cannot convict the defendant on
the evidence in this case hsyond a
reasonable doubt, declare him not
guilty. If the daiendant had not been
able to produce such rcnuwned counsel,
and hut for tho influence of some OF
his witnesses, it would NOT take you
long to convict him. | will not laave
unturned any stone in my efforts to
punish those who Gidoi and Allotted
l]oggs.
Addressing the Jury, Judge Bradford
said This is an important case. The
testimony is yuluminnus. The law, in
sumo respects ia novel. Therefore, the
court ioels that it you'll not be doing
it's duty 10 the government and tho
the jury at present. The court thinks
that it would no bettor TINT, in Greer
That you mny be fully provided with
the law, you be disehnrgnu until Sntuf-
day afternoon. Judge Bradford repeated
the caution imposed mt tho beginning
of the trial, and told tho jurors that
} they could render a verdict or any day
they desired.
) Judge Bradford began charging tho
jury at .. AZ O'Clock, and consumed an
hour and 10 minutes. In his intro
luctory remarks, he quoted soctiona
! 300 ami liA0 of the Revised Statutes
of the United States, which tho de-
PENDANT had been accused NJ violating.
made some comments thereon and
! enumerated the indictments counts
abandoned by the prosecution, 10 which
section 5440 applies. 4 person con
victed of violating section 5000 is to he
imprisoned not less than five years nor
more than fen.
) Continuing, Judge Bradford said
substantially;
"You should especially look to the
interest any witness who has testified
, before you 10 this casa has in its re-
suit. Where witness has a direct
) personal interest in tho reHult Of the
t case the temptation ia strong to color.
= pervert or withhold the facts. The law
| permits the defendant, at his own re-
3 quest, to testify in his own behalf.
Q The defendant here haa availed himself
] of this right. His testimony is before
Q you and you must determine how far it
: is credible. The deem personal interest
2 which he has in the result of this case
should he considered by you in weigh
ing his evidence ami in determining
, how far or to what extent, il at all, it
is worthy Of credit,
"In considering the credibility OF or
. the weight which you should give to
, the testimony OF the defendant, you
should regard, among other things, this
! Inherent probability or improbability
:. Of bis statements, his Intelligence or
:. want of intelligence, his opportunities
It for knowledge Of business methods and
q to what extent, if any, he has been cor
. roborated byRother evidence ia the case.
9 The defendant testified in effect that in
e giving the checks on the First National
Bank of Dover to g. b. Cuthbert K
Co. he was acting solely in bohRf and
g for the benefit of William N. Boggs
it that he reposed confidence in William
g N. BoggH; that be was led to believe
i from various SOURCES that William N.
it Boggs owned and could command large
:. sums of money; that be and William
/. N. Boggs were close personal friends
IS that at the instance of William N.
q Boggs and solely for this benefit and
d advantage Of William N. Boegs he en-
j. gagged in the transactions with i. b.
Ia Cuthbert Sc Co. already mentioned
!, that he bad received assurances from
!. William N. Doggs that the latter would
q deuosit from time to time in the First
10 National Bank OF Dover sufficient
It moneys to meet the checks which the
d defendant should give in conducting
II the transactions above mentioned; that
N relying upon these assurances he gave
ls to e. 3. Cuthbert & Co. his own in
1t dividual checks upon the First Ma.
q tional Bank Of Dover. and that he did
q not ut any time until about week
I. before the flight of William N. Boggf
T. know or suspect that the lattsr had
a been fraudulently using the mnneys oil
u the Fret National Bank Of Dover t.
D. pay his, thu Defendants, checks il
10 favor Of E. Il. Cuthbert e. Co. Aside
from other evidence in tine case is thii
le statement by the defendant credible
D. While this question is for your solt
10 discrimination. | shall direct your at
re- tention to other statements incudeh il
the testimony of the defendant The
TX defendant further testified to the efTec'
nj thAt before May 7th, 1896. he was in
formed by William n. Boggs that BIT
t had maize money at Iron II race track
u that he mad representatives, at the racI
,g tracks at Washington and Gloucester
10 that he played poker every night; tina
ia he went TO Philadelphia nearly ever.
10 afternoon and came down on the mid
q. night train, and that 10 order to avoit
ce attracting attention he took aluepe
ut and roile down to and got out at Dover
ar Beside tine information OF his irregu
,y larities of conduct impaired by vii
at liam N. Boggs 10 the defendant tn
ut latter was at tho same time aware o
ut the fact that William N. Boggs wa
paying and receiving teller of the FRS
l National Bank Of Dover. The do
ID PENDANT further testified that durinI
tile period covered by the allegeI
No fraudulent checks be was told by Wal
tn liam N. Boggs that he. William n
n Boggs, was known at the poker table
he johnson, and was further told tina
n whenever he, the defendant, had occa
sion to send telegram from Whining
il ton to him, William N. Boggs, TO wir
ug 1t to him as johnson. The defendHn
d. further stated that no, William n
be Boggs, did not want anybody TO wir
I'd him from Wilmington by hia RICH
it name because it might ne thought tina
it. might have reference to poker il tn