Evening journal., 1898-05-16

are for your determination. The counts
numbered from fourteen to twenty-seven,
both inclusive. in substance charge that
the defendant did. with intent to injure
and defraud the First National Bank of
Dover. aid and abet William n. Boggs
who was the teller, unlawfully to abstract
the moneys, funds or credits OF that bank
Tor the use, benefit and advantage OF the
defendant William n. Boggs having the
intent through such abstraction TO lnjure
or defraud the bank. The counts number
ed from twenty-eght to thirty-nine, both
! inclusive, I'm substance charge that the
defendant did, with intent to injure and
defraud the First National Bank Of Do
YER aid and abet William N. Boegs who
was teller. wifuly to msapply the
moneys, funds or credits of that bank for
the use, benefit and advantage of the de-
tendant, William n. Boggs having the
| intent through such misappliance to in
jure and defraud the bank. The forty
third and forty-fourth counts In substance
charge that the defendant did unlawfully
and fraudulently conspire with William
n. Boggs unlawfuly to abstract the
moneys OF the First National Bank Of
Dover for the use, benefit and advantage
OF the defendant, with intent on the part
OF the defendant and William n Boggs
to inJure and defraud said bank. The
forty-hfth and forty-sixth counts. being
the last two counts in the Indictment.
I'm substance charge that the defendant
J did unlawfully and frauduently conspire
! with William n. Boggs unlawfully to mis-
J apply the moneys OF The First National
Bank OF Dover for the use, benefit and
r advantage OF the defendant with intent
) on the part OF tho defendant and William
{ N. Boggs to injure and defraud said bank
In order to warrant conviction Of the
q defendant under all or any OF the counts
, numbered from fourteen TO twenty
I seven. both inclusive, all or the essential
= ingredients Of the offense as charged
therein must have been established TO
= your satisfaction beyond reasonable
! doubt Under these counts II IS neces-
sary I'm order to find a verdict of guilty
that you shall be satisfied that William
? n. Boggs unawfully abstracted moneys.
\ funds or credits OF Tho First National
Bank Of Dover for the use beneht and
advantage OF the defendant, and with
s intent on the part OF William n Boggs
to injure and defraud that bank; and
further that the defendant with like in
tent to injure or defraud that bank
- knowingly and fraudulently aided or abet
u ted William N. Boggs in effecting such
abstraction. In order to warrant a con
viction OF the defendant under all or anl
Of the counts numbered from twenty
| eight to thirty-nine, both inclusive, al
Of the essential ingredients OF the offens
= as charged therein must have been estab
lished to your satisfaction. Under thes
y counts Il is necessary in order to fn
y a verdict OF guilty that you shall be salts
d fed that William n. Boggs unlawfully an
n wilfully misappled moneys, funds. o
~ credits Of The First National Bank O
Dover for the use, benefit and advantag
u, Of the defendant, and with intent on IN
~ part of William n. Boggs to injure or de
fraud that bank; and further that tn
III defendant with like intent 20 injure O
defraud that bank knowingly and fraudr
" lently aided and abetted william ,
y Boggs in effectng such misappllance.
~ order to warrant a conviction OF the do
~, fendant under either the forty-thiI
- | count or the forty-fourth count all
VI the essential ingredients OF the offen
on as charged therein must have been q
~ tablished to your satisfaction. Und
these counts it is necessary IN order
- find a verdict of guilty that you sha
be satisfied that the defendant and WI
a." lam n. BOggs conspired together unlav
fully to abstract moneys, funds
credits OF The First National Bank
~, Dover. for the use benefit and advantal
Of the defendant. and with intent TO II
Jure OF ueIrduu lndL uduks huu AuiAN
ny that either the defendant or William J
les Boggs or both Of them. did some act
N effect such unlawful abstraction. In O
IT. der to warrant a conviction Of the defen
lot ant under either the forty-ffth cou
lot OF the forty-sixth count all OF the G
10 sential ingredients Of the offense
charged therein must have been esta
eo lished TO your satisfaction. Under the
ny counts It is necessary in order to find
eu verdict Of guilty that you shall be sat-
ne fed that the defendant and William
ms Boggs conspired together unlawfully a
on' wllfully to misapply moneys. funds
nt' credits Of The First National Bank
ty- Dover for the use, benefit and advanta
ISL OF the defendant and with intent to inju
TN and defraud that bank; and further I'll
TO either the defendant or william n. Bogl
or or both OF them. did some act to eff
ne such unlawful or wilful misapplicauC
nts Before adverting to the evidence I'm
lth case. I shall now bring to your attenti
vs. some OF the principles Of law necessa
ese for your guidance IN determining up
the your verdist
'lu- The law prosumcs that persons chars
I'M with crime are innocent until they
ich proved by competent evidence to
old guilty This presumption is evidence
nts | favor OF the defendant and stands as
'Nt | 1ulllIltlI liONNfAlon uAlltna II lla1 NA
er- overcome and removed by the evideI
nts in this case. taken as a whole. proving
irst guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. To jus
irst fy a verdict OF guilty the evidence
mt. duced in this case. as a whole. must
let such as TO exclude every reasona
hypothesis but that OF guilt OF the
- fendant as charged I'm one or more OF
counts OF the Indictment; and from I
- It, of course, follows that II the jury
ies that all the evidence IN the case WI
II taken together is as compatible with
- theory OF innocence as with the the'
OF guilt there should be an acquittal Z
commission of criminal offense can
- proved by circumstantial evidence
ers. we'll as by direct evidence, provided
circumstances proved, together with re
= enable inference drawn from them,
such as TO leave no reasonable doubt
the minds of the jury that the defend
is guilty. You are to take into consid
I. alton all the evidence I'm the case wi
kea direct and circumstantial. together "
all reasonable differences to be dra
from that evidence I'm arriving at a C