Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-05-15
LAWYER FIELDS GUILTY
Jury's Verdict on Embezzle-
mont Charge.
UNDER $4,000 BOND
UNDERSTOOD DEFENSE WILL
MOVE FOR NEW TRIAL.
Conviction Under Third Count Of an
Indictment Which Originally Con-
sisted Of Eight Counts.

A verdict Of guilty as indicted was rem
dered by jury in Criminal Court No.
late this afternoon in the case of Thomas
M. Fields of the local bar. Mr.. Fields, in
his capacity as one of the receivers of the
defunct Washington Beneficial Erlow-
ment Association was accused of en-
bezzling funds of the association.
The conviction was under the third count
of the indictment, which originally con-
sisted of eight counts On demurrer four
of the counts were eliminated. The case
finally went to the jury on the third count
only, which placed the ownership of the
money alleged to have been embezzled in
the Washington Beneficial Endowment AS
ISOLATION.
In less than half hour from the time
the jury retired 1t was reported that an
agreement had been reached. A delay &C.
CURED by reason of the fact that the court
was out at luncheon. large throng, in
Guiding many members Of the bar, assem-
bled in the courtroom and adjacent cor
ridors.
The words Of the foreman Of the jury in
dicating conviction had no apparent effect
on the defendant. Cool and imperturba Bile,
he made suggestions to his counsel, and
moment later listened with rapt attention
to the eulogy paid by fellow member OF
the bar in formally announcing to the court
the death this morning Of veteran petit
toner.
Will Move for New Trial.
1t is understood to be the intention of
the defense to move for new trial, and, If
necessary, to appeal to the Court of APP
peals. When the question or liking Dali
pending further action by the court arose,
Assistant United States Attorney Easily
Smith asked that the amount OF the bond
be $4,000.
It was decided that $4,000 would be suf-
ficent and the Title Guaranty and Trust
Company of Scranton, Pa. qualified in the
latter sum, and Mr. Fields was released.
The intention of the United States attor-
ney is to call the case of the other re-
A murder case is on the assignment for to-
morrow, and the Crawford-LorenZ-M aehen
Post Office Department case Is scheduled
to begin next Monday.
MIR. Bakers Argument Begun.
When the proceedings were resumed this
morning, Attorney D. w. Baker of counsel
for the defense began the closing argu-
ment to the jury in behalf of Mr.. Fields.
Attorney Baker spoke vigorously for near
ly one and half hours. He reviewed
the testimony and said that from the
standpoint of the defense it was impossi-
BILE to convict his client.
Among other things, Attorney Baker ar
gued that the ownership Of the money al
legged to have been embezzled was not
established by proof. The prosecuting at
torneys were criticized for not discussing
before the jury the question Of the owner
ship of the money.
1t was pointed out by the speaker that
the Court of Appeals has decided that
while the conveyance of its property by the
Washington Beneficial Endowment Associa-
ton to the Commercial Alliance Life In
surance Company was not valid, that de-
cision did not reinvest the title to the prop
erty in the Washington Beneficial Endow-
ment ASsocia ton.
If the association did not have title to
the property. and IL the distributes did not
have the ownership of the same. according
to Attorney Baker, the defendant must be
acquitted.
Are you going to find the ownership Of
this money In a place where the United
States attorney proved 1t was not?' Attor-
ney Baker asked in concluding his address
mo. You are going to render a verdict,
not on general principles, not on poetry and
scripture, but on the indictment and the
law
District Attorney Closes.
The concluding address of the trial was
made by United States Attorney Beach
whose remarks were very brief. The pros
ecuting attorney spoke eloquently, and
urged that the defendant had been proved
guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Reference
was made to Mr.. Fields co-receiver. the
speaker announcing that the co-receiver
was not being shielded by the prosecution,
and adding that he also would be brought
to trial and prosecuted, as the law required
The charge of the court to the jury did
not consume much more than fifteen min
utes. The sixth count Of the indictment,
alleging the ownership of the money in the
four distributes of the fund. was elm
mated from the consideration of the jury on
the ground that the decree directing the
distribution was not signed until May 5.
1904, and that there had been no embezzle-
ment alleged since February 20, 1904.
Therefore, the case went to the jury on
the sole question of whether the defendant
embezzIed money belonging to the Washing
ton Bneficial Endowment Association. as
alleged In the third count of the indictment.
The question OF fact for the jury to deter
mine, it was stated. was did the defendant,
as receiver, embezzle property belonging
t. the association. The jury was admonish-
ed not to convict the defendant .of being
a lawyer''-he was accused Of embezzlement
only,