The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1900-10-03
MATHEWS FOUND GUILTY.
jury REoUIRED JUST TWELVE
MINUTES 10 HIRING ~ 4 VERDICT.

with Larceny AFTER Trust of $1,000.
An support Of the INSTRUMENTATION
Hard Fought from beginning TO
End-Tvvo Other Indictments Yet
Intrfed-Mathcsy. Protested tis
Perfect Innocence OF the Oncnse,
but Told a Lame and Inefficient
story.
Al O'Clock last night the jury that
had been trylnE all day the case against
". C. Mathew. charged with larceny
after trust Of $3.50 from his employers
Murphy a co.. rctuuei o verdict Of
guilty. without recommendation. The
Jary had been out % tne court room just
4welve minutes.
Sentence was not pronounced immclllte-
Is. there beine sWo other cases against
Mathew which are yet 90 oo tried ana
Judge Failsaut. iu acoordHrce with his
usual custom. rerortlng sentence ~ all
OF them un.H hn have been disposed ~
by the terdicts of jures Mathew va
taken back 20 ilu. IIo had heard clcr,
Carr read che verdict OF the jury without
my manifestation 90 emotion. maintuiu-
ing the same air Of oomposYre shat had
marked bis conduct and appearance dus-
ans the trial
The case on trial was founded on tho
fnst % the three indictments that have
been found hy t1c grand jury The two
others are practically Identical with tnc
arst 30 every particular. cave thc date
OF the crime charged, and the amount OF
money alleged 20 have been misapproprf-
aied By Murphy Il CO.'S some,im, man
oyer.
Some six or seven witncsscs were exam
tined during the course Of the trial the
mos important being Mr. David g. car
son. teller or the ssvaunlh Bank and
Trust Company. Ill s. ~ FhDlan. vice
president Of thc corporation al Murphy a
Co. ana Mr.. J. a. Potts. formerly opera
tor ana al present manager OF the savan-
nah office Of the company They began
their evidence after Judge Fall.eant had
ovorruled "a motion made by Col George
r Cam OF counsel for Mathews TO
auash the indictment
Mr.. Carson testified 90 the payment Of
the money. alleged to have been convert
81 90 his own use By Matthew. 10 that i'm
dividual tu person. on che morning 81
june Q The money Wa paid over iu ac-
cordaucc with code telceraphlc inatruc-
tions from the Atlanta office Of the cor
poration. which maintained TWO accounts
al the bank The smaller OF these was
subject a. the personal check OF Mathew
aa manager, while the larger could only
b. drawn upon by Murphy a Co. or some
ofIcer OF the corporation So person.
Mr. Carson said that Mathews asked for
the cash for tho order. saying be- preferred
. Il fsa "a.
request which 80 appeared WIS an I'M
usual one. by saying that D. had Gus
tomer who wished 90 receive the money
due him by the company without having
his name appear in tho Transaction
Hence the customer did not care 20 have
> check. Mr Carson gave Mathews s. 90
81 the shape he wanted a. II was on the
day Of his disappearance from the city
that this order had besn oashed
Air j. 4. Potts who was the operator
for the company IN Savannah a. the time
Of the disappelrance 81 The c0mpany's
manager. testified 10 q number Of facts
tn connection With the alleged larceny
after trust. lie said that he had made
a close search OF the hooks Of the CON
Germ TO show what had hesn done with
the S2Ooo In question. but that no entry
Of Il appeared on either cash book or
ledger Neither had Mathews ever vol
unteered any verbal or written eNpiaua-
ton on the subject
Tho testimony 81 Mr. Phelan had regard
TO the request made by Mathews upon the
Atianta Office Tor 5000 and the response
chat had been made iu the shape 81 the
teleRraphic order upon che Savannah Bank
and Trust Company. Hc also stated that
no explanation had ever been mad 10 him
by Mathews In the manner "a which this
money had been applied and that NO ac-
count Of its application appeared Ia the
books OF tho company
This evidence made arp the essentials OF
the charge or larceny after trust The
Testimony was constantly interrupted hy
objections from Col Cam. these being
based largely upon his theory inst tho
establishment Of branch Offices outside the
state OF New York was an act beyond the
corporate powers Murphy & Co and
hence that the larceny after trust. con
ceding shis crime 20 nave been committed
by the defendant could not have been com
inltted from the corporation. but from the
indivuai shareholder by whom the money
was sent from Atlanta Most Of these
objections were overrulod hy the court
The state closed its case at tho time OF
the 2 o'clock recess with the ofier 800 EVIL
deuce OF the charter OF Murphy a Co oh
tanned from the New York courts Fur
Their considerable Of the case was post
poned az that hour uutll O'Clock IN the
afternoon
There was an interesting incident That
cana up when court again convened. that
served very cmectuaiiy 10 break the mo-
notony OF the trial This was tho dIsHp-
pearance for a time OF Juror Walter j.
Nell
The case proceeded with Mathews on the
stand and making his statement Il ui-
terly failed so convince the Jury that De-
was sincere in anything boz had 20 say
Mathews started out hy telling the Jury
he ala not want 20 throw mud n state
ment which he followed with mud-throN-
fng that spatterod Murphy & Co from
head 20 foot he Hvowed that hts former
employers were engaged 10 the conduct u
a bucket shop pure and simple. ana that
they had not capital enough 90 conduct a
legitimate brokerage buFiuess Of tho mae
nitude Of the bucket chop business thav
actually did conduct Murphy q CO.. said
abe defendant had "a capital Of only 500 3
Goo which would be- totally Inadequate 10
the business they did IL they actually pur-
chased and were prepared 60 deliver the
stocks and other mercantile commodities
ordered bv thcir customers what ac-
tually happened was bet made between
the customer and Murphy a. Co in refer
ence 20 the market as 90 whether IL
would go up or down.
Mathews claimed further that the busi-
ness OF the firm was 30 managed that 81
stood no chance 90 lose. tho quotations
being repeated from the Atlanta 10 tho