The sun., 1898-12-17

3Q64 Qt ~ c0u0lbb0us " u9 eccyuhv ~
testi6ed 10 on the part Of the Govern
ment; that he relied entirely upon the
bank 10 keep his account; thst whenever
II was necessary for the defendant to
make deposit or to cover bis accounts
the officials Of tile bank always notified
him, and at no time when notified that
he had oyerdrawn or had q check and
his funds we're not sufficient to pay IT
that he did not promptly get the money
and make it good.
The defendant in his testimony fur
thcr denies in effect any fraud on his
part in connection with any of the
checks set forth in the consolidated in
dictment as it now stands. The defend
ant, however, further testified that ne
drew checks in the ordinary. course OF
his business without any question as to
whether his account wonld be good at
the time or not, and always relied on
the bank to give him notice when any
Of his checks should come in If his &C.
count was not sufficient to meet it. The
defendant also denies the statement
made by William N. Boggs as to the dis
cussion of the extradition laws, and his
advising William N. Boggs to 60 to
Cuba.
Of course il you should believe from
the evidence that the defendant in Civ
ing checks mentioned in the consoli-
dated indictment, as it now stands, for
the use and benefit of William N. Boggs,
or himself, honestly believed that Will
liam N. Boggs, or himself, as the case
might be, had ample means of his own
to pay the same, and that the same were
being paid by William N. Boggs out Of
his own money or the money of the de-
fendant as the case might be and not out
OF the moneys Of the First National
Bank of Dover, you could not convict
the defendant with respect to those
check transactions.
One OF the main questions in the case,
go far as it relates to the counts OF con-
solidated indictment, part /, is whether
or not the defendant, with intent to in
lure and defraud The First National
Bank of Dover, wilfully, unlawfully and
fraudulently, aided or abetted William
N. Boggs, the teller, wilfully and unlaw..
fully to misapply the moneys, OF
that bank, for the use, benefit and ad-
vantage OF the defendant, or Of William
N. Boggs, as respectively charged in
those counts; he, William N. Boggs,
having in making such misap-
plication like intent, and the
defendant knowing that William N.
Boggs was teller.
You must be satisfied, in order to find
verdict of guilty on these counts, that
the defendant had knowledge OF the in.
tention of William N. Boggs SO to mis-
apply the moneys of The First National
Bank of Dover and that the defendant
did some act or acts for the purpose ol
aiding or abetting William N. Boggs in
making such m;sapplication.
If the other ingredients of the crime
existed, the aiding or abetting could be
accomplished through the instrumental
ity of check or checks drawn upon The
First National Bank Of Dover which
either caused or facilitated the prohibited
misapplication Of the funds. Under al
the counts now remaining in consoli
dated indictment, part l, all Of which
charge the defendant with aiding Of
abetting William N. Boggs wilfully, un
lawfully and fraudulently to misapply
the moneys OF The First National Banl
of Dover, the drawing of fraudulen
check by the defendant and his procur
ing it to be paid by William N. Boggs
the teller, out Of the funds Of the banI
in manner as alleged in such counts
constitutes an act Of aiding or abettini
. within the meaning OF the law.
Much has been said on the subject o
overdrafts and the circumstances unde
! which they are or are not criminal unde
Section 5000 of the United States revised
statutes. A man may overdraw his &C
, count in bank and be innocent of an!
evil or unlawful purpose. Overdraft
; are not uncommon in bank transactions
A bank may desire to accommodate TEN
, porarily depositor, and if a deposito
knowingly makes an overdraft, his re
] lations with the bank or its officials ma,
be such as to prevent the taint of crimi
/ nality from attaching to the transaction
, But no man who is without balance tt
) his credit in bank, or who has only al
: insufficient balance, has right to draw
) checks for considerable amounts, with
: out the knowledge or consent of tn
proper officials, and with fraudulen
, intent that the moneys of the bank il
which he has no funds or not sufficien
funds to his credit, should be applied tt
| the payment o. those checks.
The defendant cannot be convicted
/ under consolidated indictment, part ], a
: it now stands, unless he had wrongful
! or illegal intent to injure or defraud th'
, bank in drawing the fraudulent check
therein alleged, or some one or more O
, them get forth in consolidated indict
ment, part !, as it now stands. Whethe
J or not he had that intent is to be de
! termined by the facts and circumstances
and the surroundings at the time HI
, drew those checks. If he knew or hat
: good reason to believe when he drew thu
checks set forth in consolidated indict
F.; ment, part !, as it now stands, that they
: or any OF them were to be fraudulent.
l paid by William N. Boggs, tn
! teller, out of the funds of tn
] bank, and not ont OF any funds t.
which he, the defendant, could legiti
l mately resort, he had the guilty intent
3 and although it may have been the in
4 tent of the defendant at the time h
. drew the alleged fraudulent checks men
/ toned in consolidated indictment, part l
8 to finally recompense or remedy the in
8 Jury resulting from his act to The Firs
! National Bank OF Dover, such an inten
2 to correct the wrong does not absolv'
. him from guilt. Nor would the fact,