The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-03-23

1EI sszzuuzz'z'saaz1
would hurt him worse. Mr.. Williams be-
came very wrathy, and exclaimed, If
you don't pay that money back, I'll make
you wear stripes" When he got up 10
leave, he said. Mr.. Williams exclaimed:
Don't You leave the city or I'll spend
5000 TO catch you
I'm conclusion said Mr. Haupt. Il
wish to say that have suffered torments
of mind during the last few months, and
on account of the lack of support of my
family, more than any torments l can
suffer hereafter. These are the facts, and
leave the matter in your hands,
Juror Haines inquired if Mr.. Haupt
would answer a question. Mr.. Haupt
stated his willingness to answer any ques-
ton, but Mr. Osborne objected on the
ground that il might endanger the case II
any bias should be shown by the juror.
The court stated that the defendant had
the right 10 answer a question II he
chose.
Mr. Haines asked Mr. Haupt to state
why certain checks. the numbers and
amounts Of which had been testified to,
had been drawn for greater amounts than
the vouchers accompanying them, and
what had become of this excess.
Mr. Haupt replied that he had shown
clearly that when so much money had
been drawn by the bank some had been
used to pay other vouchers. II there had
been any error he claimed. the bank was
liable for the money. The money had been
drawn from time to time and used in the
payment of other vouchers. The vouch>
| ers, he said, had all been kept loosely in
a drawer and he could not be held re-
sponsbe if all the vouchers had not been
found He could not recall from the num-
bers whether he had drawn the checks
referred 20 or not.
In reference to a credit of 800 stoch
subscription from J. w. Callahan, which
did not appear to have been deposited, Mr..
| Haupt said that it was not deposited be-
cause it was not received on that day,
! and he could not deposit II until it was
received.
The defense offered no evidence besides
Mr.. Haupt's statement, which was con-
| Guided at . o'clock
| Mr.. Hartridge made a point upon the in
! dictment that the time specified was Sept
! %. 1898 whereas the evidence showed that
! the defendants connection with the COM
| pany ceased ten DAYS before that The
| gist of ENLIGHTENMENT is the employment
of the accused by a chartered corpora
| ton, he said and the time is Of the es-
! seuce of the offense Of embeZzlement Mr.
! Hartridge held that as the indictment
| stated that the offense was committed
! ten days after it was possible for the
| defendant to have committed the offense,
that he should hold that under this in
djctment there could be no legal convic-
ton, even should the jury believe the de-
| PENDANT to be guilty.
Mr.. Osborne said that Mr.. Hartridge
was wrong in claiming that time was OF
/ tha Of fbsa defense Of ha
element, and, therefore, his conclusions
were wrong. The offense could be
! proven any time within the time allowed
! by the statute, he held.
Mr.. Osbornes speech for the prosecu-
ton was a powerful Indictment of the
accused. 1t was a sickening case he said.
| The solicitor dwelt particularly upon the
ingratitude OF the defendant in attempting
| to slur the man who had befrended him
and whom he had afterward so outrage.
ously robbed. The evidence did not rest
upon the word or memory of Mr.. vii.
liams, he said, but upon the testimony OF
| the book, which this man himself had
penned. His own figures showed that he
had gotten 1904 for which there was nc
| accounting. Particular emphasis was
laid upon the fact that a man who valued
| his services as an expert accountant Sc
| highly could not tell where the money
had gone and that though he had ha6
since last September in which to examine
the books and ascertain if there were any
| errors the showing against him. he had
made no effort to do so. The conclusion
was inevitable that the accused knew
where the money had gone, and that il
was not worth while for him to look in.
side the books
Mr.. Hartridge, in opening his argument
for the defendant, laid stress upon hi.
/ Atfaf Will fafe
alleging the offense to have been commit.
ted on a date after he had severed hi,
connection with the company and claimed
that under this showing the Jury coulf
not convict his client, even II it believed
him to be guilty of the offense charged
There was nothing remarkable, he said
in the fact that the accused should b,
unable to recall any particular transac
ton. There would be difficulty in keen
ing up with these matters where the book,
were not kept up to the day. Checks wer,
drawn to pay three or four vouchers ant
/ vouchers were sometimes not put into tn,
books until several days after the check:
were drawn. It was only natural tina
there should be some confusion. Their,
was nothing remarkable in the fact tina
the defendant should now be unable 1,
account for these various amounts Their.
had been no attempt to conceal the fac
that currency had been secured on thes,
checks. as the fact was noted upon th,
stubs and this was evidence that Their,
was no intention to defraud 1t was no
reasonable to expect that the defendan
could explain offhand transactions which
occurred. some Of them, as far back al
| eighteen months ago.
Mr.. Hartridge said that, next to tomb
stones, figures are the biggest liars, an,
that the last thing on earth 20 send
man TO the penitentiary on was figures
They would be In danger of doing great in
Justice to convict on figures and figure
| alone.
Judge Faligant charged the jury that
although che indictment alleged Sept. 2
as the date OF the offense. that il the,
found from the evidence and believed
to be true, that within the statutory hmi
OF four years the accused had commit