The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1904-03-02
PETERSON CAN AGAIN
SUE SURETY COMPA
Judge Kelly Grants New Trial
of Collectors Action Against
Heino's Bondsmen.


Judge Kelly yesterday granted new
trial of the action brought by Collector
John Peterson against the National
Surety company to recover for losses
sustained by Peterson by reason of al
legged shortages by John Heino, en-
ployed in the customs office and bonded
by the National Surety company. Heino
was tried on the charge in the federal
court and acquitted.
In granting the application for new
trial Judge Kelly thus reviews the case:
This action is brought upon an indem-
nifty bond delivered for value by the de-
f fen surety company to the PLAINTIFF,
collector of the port of St. Paul from
any willful defalcation of John R. Heino.
the collectors cashier. The bond runs
for one year from Feb. l., 1902, and is the
years.
The complaint alleges that plaintiff in
trusted to Heino some of the customs
sion Feb. L. 1902, the sum of 1,55S.4 Al:
received $50 54457 making total of s52,-
only o,61s.o4, leaving a balance unac->
counted for of $1,000 This sum, $1,000,
it alleges Heino, about March 5. 1902.
fraudulently appropriated to his own use.
Heino's Defense.
At the trial it was practically admit
ted that the plaintiff had lost $1,000 OF
these customs moneys. but it was denied
that Heino had taken it, and also 1t was
claimed that the loss, if any, occurred
prior to Feb. 1, 1902, and was therefore
trial turned largely upon the inquiry,
when did the loss occur? The jury found
generally for the defendant.
The account books and records kept py
Heino as cashier were before the court
and jury. If the action was against
Heino alone this written testimony kept
by his own hand would be practlcaily
conclusive. If not SO as against this s,. De
PENDANT they are entitled to great weight.
BY his book of daily balances 1t ap-
peared that on Feb. !, 1892, Heino had on
hand 81 SOS AT in cash. That he received
from, Feb to March II, 1902, both in,
elusive. $50, 544 81, making a grand total
of $52 113. 04 of customs moneys: 1t was
his duty to remit this money to the Unit
ed States subtreasury at Chicago through
the United States Express company.
What Heino's Accounts Show.
By his own record Heino's accounts
stood as follows: a.
To total cash. from Feb. to March IL
$50, 113. Cd.
BY admitted remittances, by express
vouchers % to 81, $4S,500.
BY cash turned over March Il, II. "a;
total, $50,613.0 "a; apparent dehclt, $l'ooo'
total, S52 11S .04.
moneys as Heino had on hand Feo. l,
and that received until March Ii thereaft-
err The defendant insisted that 1t was en-
titled to a credit of $1,000 evidenced by
and by an express receipt dated Feb.
and numbered Is, and, claimed to CORE
spond with waybill Ne. u. If this claim
is true the deficit of $1,000 in the FEB
ruary and March remittances is account
ed for The jury seems to have so re-
garded it. -
But it cannot possibly be true If the
books and receipts are true. Because the
books show that at the close of business
Jan. 81, and when business opened Feb. l:
there were 81, SOS. At in cash on hand. If
this remittance by waybill number u was
It. it follows that but s6S-47 remained.
The receipts Feb. 1 were $974.1S: which,
added to the balance, makes 81 ,O42: 90
total cash for Feb. i. Yet on Feb.-1 by
waybill % and express receipt 20 the
cashier RENTED $1,000, an impossible
financial feat with the cash on hand, even
in these days Of initiation.