The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1898-06-09
THE CASE MRS. ATKINSON

&. Il : p F a.
I'll, History OF tn. Case from The ptein.
nigga Close obssryer's yisw. OF son,r
Important Features :, mann DE.
utinlu.d on a yind!ea, ton IA Grand
Jary,. Qae,r f'roee.,turc.f ~ 4, n X
70 tho Editor otthe 1nteillgeneer.
sIR:-The case nsalnst Mrst q. w.
Atkinson, because OF her pfomlhente.
and OF her high family connections In
the state. necessarily creates very great
interest among the people In und out OF
the state. ( 2tIJ y
She was Indicted one gear ago. upon
che evidence OF Camden summers, d
grand. son OF her former husband, the
late Judge CD. Camden. upon, q
charge otiforglns her husband's name
70 certain reeciptssgivcns b. her TO one
Johua p. Owens. who had purchased a
uac, or land from Judge Camden In
1879 The receipts were signed &c. D.
Camden, pes Mrs. g. D. Camden" and
are four In number. . 4 S5lj
Mr. Summers. In order TO lndlct Mrs.
Camden, now Mrs, Atkinson, and Mr.
owens, charged before the grand fuzzy
that the receipts were necessarily. forE-
ed and fraudulent, because his grand
father never allowed any one to align
bis name TO papers OF that character.
The case was tried against both OF
them jointly last OCTOBER In the cir-
cult court of this. county. The jury
failed 10 agree, standing nine in favor
o! clearing both OF them, three voting
the other way. After remaining In the
Jury room all OF one night and part
ola day, and finding that 1t was i'm.
possible to agree. two OF the Jurors,
who had voted to. acquit, went over to
the other side in order: to get released
from confinement. and so the fact went
70 the country that the jury stood seven
tur acquittal and Ave for conviction,
/ when II was not q true statement OF the
case. ls x 81 VI g3tl ~ y y
At the first trial OF the case, In Oc-
;ober last, demurrer was argued by
Judge Drannon. one OF Mrs. Atkinson's
{ attorneys, based upon the fact that
receipt signed &C. d. Camden, per Mrs.
@. D. Camden" was not q forgery. and
prepared an able an exhaustive brief on
The subject, which was printed and was
sent TO large number OF lawyers
throughout the state. The court, how
ever, held that the Indictment was good,
and the case went to trial, with the
result above stated.
General C. C. Watts and Hon. War
( ten Miller, NJ. c., were employed as ad-
dltIonal counsel In the case, who APP
peared ut the present term OF Court and
ably and learnedly re-argued the de-
nurrer, and also entered motions to
quash on other .imperfections in the
Indictment. General Watts effort was
4 exhaustive. and created wonderful
Impression upon both the court and the
people. The Judge sustained the mo-
ton, and quashed the indictment for
the reason that guilty, knowledge on
: the part OF Mrs. Atkinson was not aver
red IN the Indictment as to her. The
cunt In the Indictment as to Owens
was held TO be good, and the case
against him was placed on trial.
As, soon as the indictment against
Mrs: Atkinson was quasnea, the PROSE-
cutting attorney OF the county arose
and requested the Judge TO send for
: the grand Jury and deliver TO them a
special instruction as to forgery. The
proposition was. opposed by Mrs. At
y Nason's attorneys. but the Court sent
FOR the grand Jury and instructed them
as requested. Whereuponi witnesses
/. were Immediately sent before. them with
view Of re-indicting M.s. Atkinson. Az
( ter considering the subject for full
3 day, the grand, jury reported that no.
Indictment had been found against
S her. and whi!e-the court was preparing
70 discharge the grand jury from fur
+ ther service, one OF Mrs. .Atkinson's
: attorneys, stated that II the jury had re-
fused 10 indict, he thought 1t would
: &c proper to ask them to return to their
room and write. across the Indictment
"Not q True Blll.",i5T The court again.
\ q. the request OF the prosecuting attor-
lay, instructed them, on the law ofIan
I accessory In forgery, and sent them
back to their room. Although only two
cut OF the sixteen had the day pre-
r!ous voted to indict Mrs. Atkinson,
when. they.went back to their room thir-,
teen out OF the sixteen voted to indict
her, and instead OF returning not a
true bill, they found exactly the ,oppo-
Ete and indicted he:. The e1plana-,
ton for this sudden change Of heart"
4 Is stated here Is that some of the
grand Jurors considered II aEreaection
upon them to ask them TO place them
telyes on record. Z
To say the least. the flop surprised
every one, and none more SO than the
attorneys for the state. Another re-
rarkabls fact Is that they not only
re.!ndlc,ed Mrs. Atkinson. but they
found true bill against Owens for the
zane offense for which he was then
On trail. y
Yrs. Atkinson and her friends are not
at all discomfitted because there are
other receipts OF this kid, signed by
as', scattered over perhaps two or more.
Counties. and the prosecution claims
that they are all fraudulent. and that
aey Intend 10 indlct her. II they can.
!. all OF those counties. Therefore, she
expects TO fight the case 60 q finish In
Ills county.
In the. trial last October, Mrs. Atkin-.
son presented some dozen or more per-
sons who held receipts similar to those.
gwen TO Owens, signed by5"G. D. Cam
DIN, per Mrs. G. D. Camden" who
iToEe that they were all signed In
tae!' presence In Judge iCamden's l!fe-s
time, and at the judges dictation. She
also Produced thirty or more witnesses
a that trial who swore that she was
vel known to be the amtnuensls and
agent OF her husband during the eight
Years. he was his wife. A banker from
harrisburg testified that Mrs Camden,
e!d Practically all OF her husbands
tankins business. and that she fire.
euentlS signed the judges name TO,
MeclIs on that bank. etc. Notwlth-
Standing all this testimony, which was
10 no wise inpeacEed. the jury refused
| 70 AEtes. henansa of ihn hnIlinC out OF