The sun. (Wilmington, Del.) 1897-19??, 1898-05-17

violation sections 52O9 and 5440, U. S.
r. S.
And the said Thomas S. Clark. in his
proper person, cometh into court here,
and having heard the said Indictment
read, saith that the l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, s,
8, 10, IL, l2, l3, IA, II, 90, 40, Al and AZ
counts of the said indictment and the
matters contained in the said several
counts, in manner and form as the same
are above stated and set forth, are not
sufficient in law, and that. he is not
bound bv the law of the land to answer
the same, and this be is ready to verify;
wherefore because of the insuficiencv of
the said several counts, the said Thomas
S. Clark prays Judgment and that by
this court he may be dismissed and dis
charged from the said premises in the
said several counts in the said indict-
ment. -..
And the said Thomas S. Clark, accord
ing to the form OF the statutes in such
case made and provided, states and
shows to the court here the following
causes of demurrer to the said several
counts of the said indictment, that is to
say:
THAT tie sad !, s, "A, II, 20 and 40
counts d. not sufficiently set forth any
offence against the said sections. 500 and
544O, OF the Revised Statutes of the
, United States.
2-That the said !, s, II, II, 20 and 40
counts do not sufficiently inforn the
defendant Of the nature and cause Of the
accusation against him.
3-That the said |, s, H. II, 20 and 40
counts do not set forth the offence with
which the said defendant IS interested
to be charged therein with clearness or
necessary certainty to apprise him of
the crime with which he stands charged.
THAT the said |, s, H. 20 and 40
counts do not furnish the accused with
such description Of the charge against
him as will enable him to make his
defence or avail himself of his conviction
or acquital for protection against 4
further prosecution for the same
cause.
s. That the said l, s, "A, 20 and 40
counts do not inform the court of the
facts alleged SO that they may decide
whether they are sufficient in law to
support a conviction if one should be
had.
6--That the said /, s, II, 20 and 40
counts consist of the statement of the
conclusion Of law and not of facts consti-
tuted the accusation against the de-
fendant.
THAT the said |, 2, 3, 1, rs, o.
10, II, II, l3, 10, II and u counts alege
that one William N. Boggs, embezzled
certain funds of the First National Bank
OF Dover, for the use, benefit and ad-
vantage OF the said Thomas S. Clark.
The word embezz,c fixed and technical
meaning; the said William n. Boggs,
could not embezz!e the said funds as
alleged in the said ], ., 3. 1, 5, 6, 7, s, o,
10, II, II, l3, 10, II and u counts for the
nse, benefit and advantage of the said
Thomas S Clark, or conspire so to do.
S--rhat the said several courts are
otherwise imperfect, irregular ard in
sufficient in law.
And also the said indictment is in
other respects uncertain, informal, in
sufficient, etc.
The checks drawn in favor of Thomas
S. Clark, through Il. b. Cuthbert,
were as follows:
May II, 1896, $3.50; May 10, 1896,
$3.50; October %, 1893, $500; October %,
1893, Sl75; November IS, 1893. S95; De-
cember 5. 5000; December y, 1893,
$l97.l5; June 2s, 1894, $l3C; July 6,
1894, $50, February u, 1896, $50: May
IL, 1896, $3.50; May 10, 1896, $3.50; No
We ember l3, 1896, $50, and March 8, 1897,
$6l.