The news & observer., 1901-04-04
DENIES IT'S STATE MONEY
If it is State Money He Will Get a
Twenty Year Sentence.
lfT is NOT He GETS TEN YEARS OR LESS
Judge Starbuck Reserved His Decision on This
Point and VIII Today Indicate il by
the Sentence Passed on
Martin.

What will MAJ. Martins sentence be?
Will he get the twenty years in the
penitentiary prescribed by law for de-
faulting state officials, or will he. by a
technicality, escape with a much shorter
term?
That IS now the roint in the case.
When arraigned :or trial in Wake su-
peror court yesterday afternoon, Mai
Martin, through his attorneys, admitted
that while he was employed as a clerk
in the office of the State Treasurer he did
appropriate money to the amount Of
S., 800 to his own use, but he denied that
he was a State officer or that the money
taken by him belonged to the State. On the
contrary he claimed that he was a per-
sonal employe of the Treasurer and that
the money taken belonged to the public
institutions, having been appropriated to
them and held in trust by the Treasurer
fer their use.
If Judge Starbuck so construes the law,
Mai Martin cannot get more than ten
years in the penitentiary and he may get
less, the term of sentence being in the
discretion of the coart. II, on the other
hand it is held that the money belonged
to the State, or that Martin was an
officer in the employ of the State, his
sentence cannot be less than twenty years
in the penitentiary.
The udge will today indicate his deci-
sion on this point by his sentence.
The defendant came into court with
his attorneys, Col. Argo and Mr.. Ryan.
1rt,o a5 hy
General Gilmer and Solicitor Jones. Mr..
Mordecai, Treasurer Lacy's attorney, was
also present.
Col Argo announced for the defendant
that he would not contest the fact of the
misappropriation OF money to the amount
of $3,S00, as charged in the bill of indict-
ment, but that the ownership OF the
money and the other facts charged, in
the bill were not admitted.
Both sides announced their readiness for
trial, and ex-State Treasurer Worth was
called to the stand. He said he was State
Treasurer. from 1895 to 1899, and that as
Treasurer of the State he was also ex-
officio treasurer Of all the hospitals of the
State, and of the penitentiary. Maj. Mar
tin was clerk in his office, having in
charge the accounts of these institutions.
He was so employed, Mr.. Worth said, un-
der authority of section 3,723 of The Code,
amended by chapter sos, Laws of 1891.
The witness then explained how appro-
priatfons for these institutions are drawn
from the General Fund by warrant from
the Auditor, and then placed to the credit
of the treasurer ex-offcio for use of the
institution to which it belongs The money
is deposited in the banks.
.'The checks on this fund were usually
sent to the person in whose favor the
voucher is drawn by the officers of the in
stitution, but payments at the central
prison here and on the State farms at
the end of/each month were made by
Mai Martin in cash. This was done by
memorandum check For instance, if Mar
tin was going out to pay off at the peni-
tentiary he would give q memorandum
check at the bank for, say $4,000, and
when he finished paying off he would find,
say 5000 left. Next day he would go to
the bank and give it check for 81 800
and 5000 cash, getting back his memoran-
dun check for $4,000
On cross examination, Col. Argo asked:
Major Martin had nothing to do in
your office except to be clerk to you as
treasurer of these institutions, did he?"
No"
And the funds of these institutions
were kept separate from the other funds,
were they not?"
Yes"
''You held these funds as treasurer
ex-officio of these institutions and not as
State Treasurer, did you not2"
Yes"
"And these appropriations were a fund
sacred and could not be used for any 9th
er purpose, were they not?'
Yes"
Major Martin had nothing to do with
these funds until they were transferred,
did he?"
NO
This completed Mr. Worth's testimony
and Solicitor Jones announced that the
State would rest, whereupon the defense
announced also that that was its case.
The Judge then inquired whether he
was TO understand that the case was
submitted on a question of whether or
not the money embezzled belonged to the
State.
Col. Argo replied that it was so sub
mitted and that in order to convict under
section 1915 of The Code it was necessary
TO prove that Martin was employed< by
the State, as such. and that the money
in his hands and appropriated by him
belonged to the State, as such He argued
that this had not been done that, on the
contrary, it had been shown that the de-
fendant was not in the employ of the
State, but of the treasurer of public in
stitutions, that the money in his hands |
had ceased 10 be the property of the
State, but belonged to these institutions. |
which are public corporations: that it |
became their property by virtue of an act
of appropriation and can only be recalled |
by another act of the Legislature
Here IS our position continued Col. |
Argo, Martin has never been an officer
or employe within the meaning of Code
section 1o15. He has never had in his |
possession any money of the State with |