The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1898-12-09
BOGGS' DE-
FALCATI0NS.
Bank Examiner Ross Tells
How He Concealed His
Stealings From the
Bank Officials.

|
bank, and Of now Mr.. Boges had carried
on the wrongful practice to tho ignorance
Of the Dover Bank officials. This testi-
mony came rs tho beginning Of tho end
! Of the governments famous cases and
from witnesses, Messrs. Boggs, Ross and
Bateman, who are essentially tho princi-
pals for the prosecution.
But during the ordeal, Eenntor kenney
never varied. Rather he seemed greatly
interested and frequently joined In amin.
aled conversation with his able counsel,
who upon their clients advice questioned
tho witnesses even more closely OH ques-
tions in point.
The afternoons work revealed nothing
new IN the case except however that the
trial had not progressed as rapidly as it
should have. Therefore Judge Bradford
remarked that the court prepared to sit Oh
Saturday at the regular hours, providing
the jurors would not bs inconvenienced,
but every member expressed himself as
being satisfied, believing that they would
got through that much sooner. But whom
ono juror inquired Of Mr. Biggs II the body
would be charged by that day. and upon
being answered In the negative, he express
cd some little disappointment which was
reflected In some other members Of the
body. 1t Is said that the case may not reach
the jury until Wednesday or Thursday Of
next week.
Erwin D. Boggs was the first witncs,
called by Mr.. Vandegrift. He said he was
clerk at the First National Bank from
May TO December /, 1895, and taking up
the individual lodger Of The bank told Mr..
Vandegrift that he had made the entries
therein shown in the regular course Of
business. William N Boggs frequently
called some of the entries. and 10 his
knowledge all were correct. They were
also entered as Mr.. Boggs called them.
Ihis line Of testimony constituted Mr.
Vandegrift's ground for proving the cor.
recl ness OF tho entries and he was about
to nave the witness go over the individu-
al figures when Messrs. Bird and Biggs
expressed themselves as being satisfied
! with what tho books showed, thereby re-
lieving the prosecuting attorney Of the
work.
| Counsel for the defense began the ques-
tioning Of MIR. Boggs Oh tho point by ask
ing him II the book he was reading from
was the individual ledger and his reply
was in tho affirmative. He also said there
| was o defalcation at the time specified,
| but not to his knowledge.
| Mr.. Bogss would not say that oven at
| TINS late day he knew of no defalcatlon,
but evidently misunderstood Mr.. Birds
| question as he subsequently said Mr.. Boggs
The defendant. had evidently informed him
wrongfully OF the figures. Tho books
| showed all tho entries were made rs Mr.
Boggs called them out, or handed the
| bank slips to him. This work was gcner-
ally done Just before tho noon hour.
Mr.. vandcgrift again taking the wit
moss referred 30 the witnesses story of Mr.,
Bogs' untrnthfulness in calling off fig
urcs, and asked whether or not tho dsfal.
cation was duo to tho Withholding Of depos-
rs crssimply calling off wrong figures
The reply was that tho books Of tho tank
had since shown that deposits had been
wi ihheld The defenso objected TO the
farm of Mr. Vandegrlfts questions bear
ing en- tho point, and the rrosecuting a..
torney changed them and tie tcs imony
went IN. MI. Boggs left tho stand alter
Mr.. Fanlegrift announced that ie would
offer books in evidence while tho exami-
nation OF William n. Soygs was In pro-
gress
Mr. Boggs found tho books before him
when lie went on the stand and first cor
roborated Ills nnmnsakos testimony on tho
poiut thas only tho two had charge Of the
ledger
Then he said the books showed that on
Juno 20, Mr. Kcnnay had deposited 800
which was not credited Oh The ledger un-
til Juno 23 1t also showed another de.
posit OF Sl3S6 on July 23swhiGh was not
credited until July 2o, and one of $1sS.S5
on December Z which was not credited IN
The ledger ;utril December H. With the
excopii IN OF these entries Mr. Bo sHs said
Mr.. Bogas explained that the lat, entry
OF the deposits was due to the fact that he
was carrying checks for MIR. K.nney Ho
admitted, however, that le would have
entered the deposits on the date they were
Inado had ho not been to busy looking after
the checks In other words the deposits
we're kept { n tho ledger until the checks
wero adjusted. There the witness left tho
stand but Mr. Vandogrift did not offer the
book in evidence as he had before iptina-
ted.
MIR Batcman upon being recalled said !
he recrllccod Mr.. Norri, story regarding |
the men who carried checks on the banks, |
and that he heard of 1t originally from |
II. L. Cooper who ut she time was assisting |
In the blnk. No reference to tho book |
was made by Mr.. Vandegrft but us soon
US Mr. Bateman left the stand tho prose-
cutting attorney offered the ledger in evil
denco because The book was not regularly
and fairly kept, but Judge Bradford ad-
mittod it,cxplaining his reason as folows
"lhc court feols constrained to admit
tho odgcr rs William N. Boggs has stated
that when lie called off tho deposit slips
Of this defendant 10 Erwin ID. Boggs, that
he William n. Boggs truthfully called
them off. Now, William N. Boggs is u
competent witness in this case. His cred-
ibi!ity Is il matter for the jury to decide,
But in point of law he Is competent and
he has so testified.
Irwin d. Boggs testified in substance
that tho entries which ho nnde in his
ledger to account Of this defend II, were
correctly madu insofar as ho Erwin ID.
Boags examined tho slips, and he further
testified that when William N. Boggs
called out to him the amount on tho siips
that ho Erwin ID. Boggs. correctly mndo
entries in tho ledger according o tho
statement SO made to him by William n:
N0Sgs.
For undor these circumstances tho court
admits the entries from May l. 1896 to DEC
omhcr 81, 1886, not as inacpcndant evil
done. OF thcmse'vts but as proper for your
consideration In connection with the tes.
timony OF William n. Boggs. and Erwin
ID. B0ggs and to show amounts Of balan-
Cos whether due by Kcnney to the First
National Bank or by tho bank to Mr.. Kcn.
noy from time to time aside fl ON tho alleg.
ed fraudulent check transaction and aside
from the three Instances just stated by
William N. Boggs who! ein deposits made
by tho defendant were net catered TO his
credit contcmporaneously
Then Tho court a'h tho Iodger would bo
in tho court clerks flee and open at any
time to the inspection of counsel in the
case. Mr.. Vnndcgrift explained that the
bt ok had been at the disposal of counsel on
the other side and the seemingly unpleas-
ant significance o! the courts remark was
dispslled.
Il. Edward Ross, the expert accountant.
who was called to the First National Bank
] June 1897. to make an examination of
tho books, said he found n shortage Of
800, 900 in the banks funds and that the
teller, William N. Boggs was RESPONSE
bic. Mr.. Ross found that many checks
had not been entered on tho books, aud
others that had not been entered until
several days after the checks had been
depo >ited. In this manner principally
Mr.. Boggs had concealed his defalcation
from tho bank directors until February
l5.
He also. ihowevor. had withheld other
depo its to cover his steRlings, and had
further taken money from the drawer.
MIR. Ross snid he had examined certain
books Of tho Farmers Bank, which con-
taincd deposi ors nainc, n custom which
was not In vogue at the First National
Bank, and found Ia them checks made by
Mr.. konney which we sent to tho First
National Bank and raid out Of that ipsti-
tutlon's funds.