Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-04-01

TRIAL COURT UPHELD
COURT OF APPEALS AFFIRMs
JUDGMENT IN ToWLEs CASE.
The Higher Tribunal Reviews the Pro-
ceedings in Lower Tribunal
Other Cases.

Inc court OF Appeals, by an opinion writ
ten by Mr.. Justice Morris, today affirmed
the judgment of the court below in the
case of Gilbert B. Towles, convicted Of for
gerry, in Criminal Court No. 3 and SEN
fenced to Imprisonment in the penitentiary
at Moundsville, w. Va, for seven years.
MI. Towles, prominent in local business cir
cies,w indicted for the forgery of five sew
eral promissory notes for $500, 81. 600, $500.
5000 and 5000, respectively, and for utter
ing such forged notes with interest to de-
fraud. The indictment contained ten counts,
five of them for the several forgeries and
five for the uttering of the notes. The fifth
and sixth counts were based upon the note
for $500; and as to this the prosecution
offered no testimony and Mr.. Towles was
acquitted. Upon the other counts of the
indictment he was convicted.
This alteration of the several notes by the
use of chemicals to remove therefrom the
original dates, amounts and places of pay
ment and by filling in the blank spaces so
made with other dates, amounts and places
OF payment, the signatures of the makers,
payees and indorsers remaining writ
ten by them, and the utterance of these
notes SO altereu to different persons each
note being delivered in renewal of another
note then to mature, were proved by the
prosecution and were admitted by the de-
PENDANT.
Plea in Defense.
The defense was that the debts for
which these notes were given in renewal
were debts for Which the persons hose
names are upon the altered notes were
legally liable, created in the conduct of a
special adventure"-the purchase of prop
erty near the battlefield of Gettysburg
IN which they were all interested and in
which they had empowered the defendant to
act for them in all financial matters; that
the alterations in question were made for
their joint benefit, and with their authority
previously conferred through a course of
dealing extending since 1892; it being also
insisted that, If such actual authority were
not found, the defendant honestly and in
good faith believed he had it, and therefore,
could not be held guilty of the intent to de-
fraud charged in each count of the indict
ment."
The trial court instructed the jury that
II 1T found from the evidence that Mr.
Towles had no authority from the other
parties to make the alterations which he
confessedly did make, or that he had no
reasonable grounds for an honest belief
that he had such authority, he should not
he excused.
The Court of Appeals lays down the prin-
Ciple that the honest belief which would
justify or excuse an act otherwise wrong
must be founded upon reasonable grounds
sufficient to warrant such belief
Upon the whole case the Court of APP
peals concludes, I'VE are of opinion that if
tHtre was any error IN the rulings or the
trial justice with regard to the exclusion
of evidence sought to be introduced by the
defendant, such error was cured by the
subsequent admission of the testimony: and
that there was no error in the instructions
given to the jury. Being of this opinion,
we must affirm the judgment appealed
from with COSTS
The prosecution was conducted by Mr.
Ashley NJ. Gould, United States attorney
for the District of Columbia.
po1ice Court Raveread
In the case of the Washington Electric
Vehicle Company, appellant against the
District Of Columbia, the Court Of Appeals
in opinion written by Mr.. Chief Justice
Alvey, today reversed the judgment of the
Police Court, holding that there was error
in the latterS ruling. The case was taken
to the Court of Appeals on writ of error
The question presented was as to the proper
construction of a provision in the license
law of the District, approved August o.
1871, in respect to the proprietors of hacks
cabs, Omnibuses and other vehicles for the
transporting of passengers for hire.
The transportation company contended
that the District of Columbia had 10 right
to assess a license fee against it under the
terms of the act referred to. asserting that
the act does not apply to vehicles of the
class used by the company. In the Police
Court the company was found guilty and
duly sentenced
The only question presented to the Court
of Appeals was whether, by proper con-
struction, the act applies to and embraces
the electric vehicles used by the company
and for which the company failed or re-
fused to obtain a license.
The Court of Appeals points out that cleo
trio vehicles were unknown at the time of
the passage of the act, and were not with
in the contemplation of the authors there
of; that ii was not intended to embra ce
every conceivable vehicle that might there
after be invented and brought into use
and that it is not pretended that every
vehicle that is run upon the streets for the
carriage of passengers is subject to a
license tax under the provision Oft the act
Other Opinions.
The Court of Appeals also handed down
opinions this afternoon as follows:
The National Safe Deposit Savings and
Trust Company, appellant. against Mary
w Heiberger; order appealed from revers-
ed with costs, and cause remanded for fur
Their proceedings not inconsistent with the
opinion. which was written by Mr.. Justice
Shepard The appeal was from order
of the Probate Court, framing the issues
to be submitted to the jury in the trial of
the caveat of Mary w. Heiberger, fled in
opposition to the probate of the will of her
father. John w. Marin. deceased.
United States ex rel Henry d. Phillips,
appellant. against the Secretary Of the In
terror and the commissioner of pensions;
order appealed from affirmed, with costs;
opinion by Mr.. Justice Morris. The order
refused a writ Of mandamus, Mr.. Phillips
having sought to require the appelees to
allow him a fee of SO in certain pension
claim. The question Of law involved was
precisely the same as that decided by the
Court of Appeals several weeks ago in a
action between the same parties.
r. Parker Crenshaw and others against
Richard p. Mccormick and others; decree
of lower court affirmed, opinion by Mr.
Chief Justice Alvey. The bill in the case
was filed by the appellants to obtain jul
dicial construction of the will of Mrs. Mary
S. Million.
Martha C. Hunt, appellant against Grace
A. Whitehead and Joseph J. Darlington,
trustees. motion for rehearing denied opin-
ion by Mr.. Chief Justice Alvey.
REAL ESTATE DEALS,