The sun., 1898-06-19

specified in said counts were in any
manner or form depleted or lost to the
National Banking Association.
8. That the said first, second, third,
fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth,
eleventh, thirteenth. fifteenth, sixteenth,
nineteenth, twentieth, twenty-second
and twenty-fourth counts do not set
forth that the said National Barking
Association was in any manner injured
or defrauded" by the loss or depletion Of
any OF it's moneys, funds or credits.
10. That the said first, second, third,
fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth,
eleventh, thirteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth,
nineteenth, twentieth, twenty second and
twenty-fourth counts do not set forth
any offence against said sections 5000
and $40 of tie Revised Statutes of the
United States, inasmuch us they charge
maladministration only OF the affairs OF
the said National Banking Association,
and not aiding and abetting in the EN-
bezzlement, abstraction or Wiliul misap-
plicat.on of the money, funds or credits
Of the said National Banking Association,
within the intent and purview Of said
section.
IL. That the said ninth, tenth, four.
teenth, seventeenth, nineteenth, twen-
teith, twenty-frst, twenty-second, twen-
ty.third, twenty-fourth and twenty.tifth
counts are not good in law, in that they
fail to allege that the said defendants
aided and abetted the said Boggs, as set
forth in said counts, with knowledge on
the part of the said defendant that the
said Biggs was, at the time of the aiding
and abetting, as alleged in said counts,
the teller OF the said National Banking
Association.
y. That the said second, third, fourth,
fifth, sixth, nineteenth, twenty-first,
twenty-third, twenty-fourth and twenty
fifth counts are insufficient in law in
that they fail to allege that the acts done
by the said William N. Boggs, as set
forth in the said counts, in which acts it
is further set forth that the said defend
ant aided and abetted him, the said Will
liam N. Boggs, were done by the said
William N. Boggs, as teller, or by virtue
of his office as teller of the said National
Banking Association.
l3. That the said first, second and
third counts do not sufficiently yet forth
any aiding and abetting of an embezzle-
ment within the purview and intent OF
Section 500 of the Revised Statutes of
the United States.
II. That the said third count does
not, within the purvlew and intent Of
section 52O9 of The Revised Statutes OF
the United States, set out any embezzle.
ment by the said Boggs, with any intent
that the said embezzlement shou d be
for his own use, but states tnat the said
embezzlement by the said Boggs was
made for the use and benefit of the said
kenney.
Is. That the said sixth, thirteenth
and sixteenth, counts are bad in law, in
asmuch as material allegations of said
counts are repugnant and contradictory.
1G. That the said sixth, thirteenth
and sixteenth counts are insufficient in
law for uncertainty in that they allege
that the said sums of money in said
counts mentioned were secured by the
said defendant, by his checks drawn to
the order of one Samuel l. Shaw, sher If,
and that said checks, upon endorsement
and presentation by the said Stnlnrl
L. SHAW, sheriff, were duly paid by the
said h gss to the said William l.. Shaw,
sheriff, With moneys, rights or credits
taken from the said Natl nal Banking
Association. While in other parts OF
said counts, it is alleged that the
moneys rights and credits til ken by said
Boggs were SO taken by him in payment
OF the obligation OF him, the said Boggs,
to T.. b. Cuthbcrt 4 Company.
II. That the seventh count is bad in
law, ,ior dupIicity and repngnancy, in that
in one part Of said count the said de-
fpndent is charged with aiding and abet-
ting said Boggs to unIawfnlly and vii
fully abstract large amount OF money,
whereas in another part Of the sad
count it is charged and alleged that the
said defendant aide and abetted tine
said Boggs to unawfully, wilfully and
irandnleitly misapply the said money
! Is. That the said seventh count is not
good in law, for that it is not therein
alleged that the act done was done with
wiiiul, unlawful or fraudulent intent,
according to the description of the
offence.
| 10 That the said nineteenth and
twenty se, ond counts are not good in
law, in that they do not allege that the
said def ndant either "injured or de-
frauded' or intended to ''injure or de-
fraud" the said National Banking Asso-
citation.
! 20. That ,he said nineteenth count
does not sufficiently change any viola
tinn of section 500 of the Revised Statute
| of the United States, in that it does not
aIIeg,. that the defendant had any know
ledge ni the charging of his, the de
fendant's checks specified in said count
upon the books OF the said National
Banking Association which said cEa"g.
ing. as alleged, constituted the unlawful
and fraudulent misapplication of the
moneys, funds and credits OF the said
National Banking Association.
q. THAI the said nineteenth count
1,ps not sufficiently allege any conver.
sion Of the moneys, funds or credits OF
the said National Banking Association
to the use or benefit Of the said defen-
dant, or any loss occasioned to the said
National Banking Association, through
any act or intent of the said defendant.
o. That the said nineteenth count is
not sufficient in law, in that the dates
when sad checks were charged to the
account of the said defendant, as speci.
fled in said count are vague and uncer-
tain, and do not supply the defendant
with the information necessary for the
preparation of his defense, or to avail
himself of his conviction or acquittal for
protection against Il further prosecution
for the same cause.
| % That the said twpnt v. first tWpnt "