The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1898-06-22
BOGGS AGAIN
ON THE STAND.
CONTINUED from first page.)

The interest in the Clark case Is getting
deeper and deeper as 1t comes to close.
The evidence on both sides has bean
marked by some good swearing and the
Jury alone can decide who was telling the
truth on the stand The argument before
the jury Is sure to be more than INTEREST
ing. while tho charge of the court is ex-
pccted to cut out u large amount Of the
evidence which has been produced.
William n; Boygs was called and Mr..
Biggs asked him II the check for $32 was
for poker. Hereplied yes
"Did Clark meet you at tho depot by ap-
pointmon,p" mo, sir"
Walter NJ. Boggs, In answer to tks Dis
trct Attorney said he examined his
brothers papers after his flight. The
check Of s32 was paid to Mrs. Boggs.
MIR. Bixgs asked where this line OF evil
dence came in rebuttal. Mr.. Vandegrift
said the court al, we'd him to prove none
OF the $4,000 bond was fol q gambling
debt.
Ibid you receive letter from Clark9'
Eyes. Tho letter was offered III evil
demo 1t referred to the $50 check"
John T.. Bcteman looked at the cheek
exchange book of the First National
Bank:
On October L.. 1899, there wero two items
One was Tar 800 anu one for $500.
On May II, lSsB there was no item in
the cash entry OF any draft for 1850.
10 Mr.. Biggs-1here arc two checks but
cannot Tell by whom they were given or to
whom they were Slver. He was shown
the Telegram given to Clark by ! bank.
Look VI that and refresh your mind and
state il it rem; ds you of anything. can
.ot say II tho draft is on tho collection
book. Looking at the writing in rcd ink
on that telegram does 1t throw any light on
this subject. 1t was ruled out.
The red ink marks Oh the telegram did
not refresh his memory in regards to any
craft. Look at he accObnt OF Thomas
s. Clark and ses II it was reduced by 25
cents about May l6, 1895" said Mr.. Biggs
Witness did so and said there was Il charge
of 25 cents on May Is, 1896 District At.
regarding the telegram. He claimed it
was irregular aud contandcd that there
was a proper place and time to put in the
telegram.
MIR. Biggs- This robuttal is to contradict
the defendant by showing this raft was
n vt deposited. Ii it can he shown that
C'ark's account was charged by an officer
Of the bank ihen il will corro1orato the
testimony of Thomas 5. Clark.
district Attorney Vandegrft Now may
it please your honor, it is for the jury to
The court ibis Is diffei ent question
from no one decided yesterday. The ono
yesterday WAS too broad. Certain evidence
has gone in that there was Il charge of 95
cents against shn defendant md that cor
responds with something written on this
paper. There i, evidence of an entry in
tho book In this case theta is II cores.
pondence between the books of The bank
ard this paper. Now he proposition is
that he should have IL right to show If this
writing Is in the haId Of an official of the
bank.
Mr.. Bateman dcposcd the writing was in
the hands of William N. Boggs
Was it the custom when u charge was
made to cancel the paper as that paper Is
cancelled?"
Dis riot Attorney Vandegrift objected
Mr.. Batcman-"It WAS IL -ual to file them
and Is evidence of % cents being paid.
"lu the course of your business at the
bank would draft brought there by
Thomas 5. Clark DO entered AS cash or Oh
tho book for collcctonY"
would entirely depend upon the cir
cumstances ut the time.
III it was net endorsed would you count
it MS CASH"
"No, sir"
"liavc you any doubt that that paper
was not at your paper"
mo dourt it passed through your bank
"What is that pare?p
ut plirports TO bo IL telegram from the
FIRST National bank of Philadelphia stat
ing that thcE b. Cuthbcrt &Co. sdraft was
refused.
Mr.. higgs-I am done with you.
Walter L.. Morris was called and looked
ut The books dated October H. 1893 On
that dale 800 aud 800 checks were 70.
ceivea from the First National bank.
The checks were drawn by 5 W. Hall
and J. L. Foard.
TO Mr. Bigg5-Thc check given byFoard
was made payable to self and he could not
tell the date.
TO the District Attorncy-Wo paid the
checks to the First National bank.
William N. Boggs looked at the paper
and deposed ho charged Ciark's account
g cents. Clark put draft in bank. He
was called and then he gavc the draft. 1t
won't into the collection book.
10 the court-The first check was paid on
May II. On or about May ia Clark told
witness that he made n sale and made u
draft for collection. Had the draft been
paid witness was to pay the first check.
William A: Stuckley, of Philadelphia,
received bill of sale for the horse Brook
Ign from Thomas s. Clark.
He produced the bill of sale and it was
admitted iii evidence. In answer to Mr..
Biggs he said be knew nothing about But
ler's lien for $500 Ho got the bill of sale
with the horse when he boughtit.
Il. d. Page,'wbo was manager for Cuth-
bert u Co, deposed on May Is, 1904 10
wrote letter to Clark. A letter press copy
was offered in evidence.
Had that Letter anything to do with
the payment of the two 800 checks asked
the District Attorney.
Witness read from the letter that the
brokers were not willing to pay the draft.
Mr.. BiRgs claimed that the witness had
boon paid the amount OF the two checks.
Puyn dcposeu that Clark was under the
impress Ion tina: he had balance He could
not say If the draft was applicable to either
OF the checks. Mr.. Biggs offered tie tele-
gram in evidence and both sides closed.
District Attorney Vandcgrift in present.
ing his prayers said he did not wish to ar.
que the law
Mr.. Blggs said that there was some very
remarkable law in the prayers Of the Dis.
trlct Attorney. 1t Is not violation of the
law to giv1a check when there are not
funds in the bank 10 meet the said check
The defendant cannot be convicted unless
alleged in the Indictment or by he stat.
ute Of limitation. Mr.. Biggs then preseu-
ted his prayers.