The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1902-08-15
new ENGLAND
man A WITNESS.
Robert |. Fosburg Denies Firm
Gave Note to J. F. DOIan.
SAYS SIGNATURE WAS FORGED.
Lapse Of Two Days Would Have Permitted
Stone Contractor 10 Escape Grim
Inal Prosecution.
SAYS SIGNATURE WAS FORGED.

New York. Aug. l5.-If the grand jury
finding an indictment against James Il.
Dolan. charging him with forgery In the
second degree. IL would have been impos-
sible 10 deal with him criminally, for the
alleged offence was committed on Aug.
8. 1897. and by the statute OF limitations
he would have been freed from all obli-
cations. as far as criminal prosecution
was concerned. on the same date this
year. but two days before the expira-
tion of that period the indictment against
him was returned.
Just what defence he will make to tho
charge on which he was arrested could
not be learned yesterday, but IL is said
that John j. Hopper, OF the contracting
firm OF Farrell a. Hopper. and brother
of Isaac A. Hopper. a Tammany district
leader. is determined he shah be punished.
He alleges that through Dolans misrep-
resentation he is out $500. and, he says,
only his Illness caused him 20 permit the
matter TO rest until IL was almost too late
TO seek redress.
District Attorney Jerome said that when
was somewhat lost TO proceed In It. fear
ing there might be some Interior motive
I'm the long delay But from his invest-
cation he felt assured it was a case which
should be submitted TO the grand jury.
and that an indictment was returned con-
vinced him he was correct.
EASILY GOT LOAN.
Dolan Is known among builders as a
purveyor of stone, and many prominent
builders are among his customers. He
had done business with Farrell g. Hop
per and. according to the officials OF the
district attorneys office, they felt no hesi-
taton in lending $500 TO him when, on
Aug. 9. 1897, he asked for that sum. the
more especially as he offered security
a note made out TO his order for 5000,
payable In three months from it's date,
which was tho preceding July Is, and
purporting to be signed by James Stewart
& Co.. contracting firm OF Buffalo.
IT is the allegation that before the note
fell due Doian went to the firm and. pre-
senting a check for the amount drawn by
himself on a bank, obtained possession of
the note. Then. II is charged, II was as
certained the check was worthless, and
a further inquiry disclosed, according TO
the authorities that Stewart q Co. never
had given the note for $500 to him and
that what was supposed to be their sig
had done business with Dolan. buying
stone from him, but had paid cash always
and never had given any note TO him.
IL was suspected he had signed the note
which he gave 20 Farrell & Hopper. and
SO Che authorities were notified But the
matter slumbered until, recently. the firm
decided 10 bring him to book before the
statute of limitations should exempt him
from prosecution. The matter was placed
before the grand jury. and after some
days his sister-in-law, Kate Fitzpatrick,
IL Is said. testified that at Dolan's
request. she had signed the note with
Stewart & Co.'S name. At that time. she
said. she was hts secretary
FosBURG A WITNESS.
Another witness who was examined be-
fore the grand jury was Robert L. Fos-
burg. OF Pittsfeld, Mass He Is the father
Of Miss May Fosburg, who was shot and
killed I'm her home nearly two years ago.
Bertha Sheldon of Providence being her
guest at the time. Mr.. Fosburg Is
brother-in-law OF a member OF the firm Of
Stewart g. Co. and at the time OF the
giving of the note to Farrell g. Hopper
he was In Buffalo as the manager OF the
firms business. In this position he was
enabled TO say the firm had not given
such q note TO Dolan. and this was
the effect OF his testimony before tho
grand jury.
In the office OF Page & Ectley. who
are the lawyers for Dolan, IL was said
yesterday he had had many dealings with
Farrell a. Hopper, and that In the last
few years he had borrowed money from
the firm and had repaid about $4,000 leav-
ing a small balance. IL was said. also. he
had been arrested on a charge to the same
effect as that on which he had been in
dicted and that when he was brought
it,
he was discharged. His full defence. IL
was added, would not be divulged until
he was brought TO trial. But he has
the note on which. II Is alleged, a forged