The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-03-27

denied positively offering amy com
promise or suggesting any settlement
of the case: in fact. they said they
had no sort of authority to make any
such offer.
Cashier. Gaut told how Shemwell
had. on February 16, 1899, obtained
the 81 800 from the Holton Bank, of
Knoxville. OF which he was cashier.
He alleged that Shemwell had one W.
\. Garland to make false pretences III
order that he might get the money;
that it was now his purpose to prose
cute him and to use the criminal law
to get the money.
This completed the evidence. The
first argument was made by Judge
Adams touching irregularities in the
requisition papers. He pointed out
the fact that there was no certificate
of the prosecuting attorney attached.
as is required by law. The other side
admitted this and asked leave to
amend.
This was granted by the Governor.
The principal argument was on the
question as to whether this was a
proper case for whether
it was genuine attempt to vindicate
the law or prostitution of the Grim
inal law for the purpose of collecting
money claimed to be due.
On this point all the lawyers in the
case were heard. Judge Adams open
ed for the defense. He was followed
by Judge Rogers for the prosecution.
Then Mr.. Robbins spoke for the de-
Tense. Mr.. Jones for the prosecution
and Mr.. Craig closed for the defense.
At the conclusion of these speeches
the Governor announced that having
granted the bank leave to have the
requisition papers amended he would
reserve his decision for a few days.
The facts in the case are most I'M
usual-the parties to the transaction
on which it is based being a very stu
pid bank cashier and a sharper
1t seems that Shemweli had some
transaction with one Aaron Maynard.
by which Maynard gave him Il note
for $4,000. secured by a mortgage on
some land in Missouri.
Sometime in February ShemNycll
went to the Holston Bank in Knox
NilIe and inquired whether w. 4. Gar
land had been there. He was told
that he had not. Then he explained
that he held a mort gage on some land
ia Missouri that Garland wanted to
buy and they had an appointment 10
meet in this bank and consumrate
the trade. Then Shemwcll went
away. Next day Garland appeared
and asked for Shemwell lie was told
OF TIE visit OF the day previous. Re
gret was expressed at missing him.
ri MI Inf
reappeared and left his papers with
the bank for Garland. On the day fol-
lowing Garland came again objected
to the price named, but told the bank
if they would make the trade for him
he would give them $50 and half of all
below $4,000 al which they could get
the land. As a pledge OF good faith
he left $500, and left. he said. for a
business trip to Alabama. When Shem-
well came back the bank opened ne
gotiations with him and bought the
note for $1,000. When Garland re-
turned he was delighted to hear what
Il fine trade they had made for him,
but he had spent all bis money
while in Alabama. He promised
however. to send the $500 immedi-
ately he got home. in the meantime
the bank was to hold the mortgage.
The bank held it and is still hold
ing it. for Garland never returned.
And now the bank alleges that May
nard is a myth and that the land in
Missouri is not worth the money paid
for it. Hence it turns to Shemwell
for its money.
Shemwell, on the other hand. says
there is such a man as Maynard and
that his transactions with him were
bona tide; that the land does exist.
that he has made no false representa-
tiOns about it, and that it is the
banks duty TO realize on it. the pur-
chaser for whom il bought it failing
in his contract.
AS to Garland. the bank alleges
that he is n citizen of IiendersopviiIe:
that he is an accomplicc of Shemwell's
and that he disappeared the day
Shemwell was arrested and cannot be
found.