Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-01-05

District auditor, the court explained The
defendant was not a mental in the service
OF an individual named James Il. Petty,
but was an official of the District of Column
bia. not appointed by the aud tor. but by
higher authority, the Commissioners.
The settlement of the question raised by
the defense, the court went on to say, must
be in the determination of whether Watson
had acted as an official TO the District or
as a mere mental to Mr.. Petty. The act
of an official clerk in respect Of the trans
fer of the checks to the bank was an Off
cial act on behalf of the municipal corpor-
alton. and not a mental act on behalf of
Mr.. Petty.
I'm carrying the checks the defendant
preformea an official dirty Justice Wright
said. in conclusion. land conversion of
property under such circumstances was en-
bezzlement, or no offense at all. Having
possession of the CHECKS rigntfully. there
could be no larceny.
THE motion mt st be overruled"
Mr.. Petty Called to Stand.
Call Mr.. Petty" Attorney Baker then
quietly directed The former auditor was
asked if it had been part of Watson's du-
ties to cash checks for the witness at the
Central National Bank
1t was" Mr.. Petty replied. Further he
stated that during the year 1901 he had at
the Central National Bank an account, as
auditor of the District of Columbia that
included the whole-cost deposit fund, and
,"o otiieT temporary accounts, one of which
mad to do with the bathing beach.
ON cross-examnation it was testified that
watson always made proper returns of
the checks cashed by him for Mr. Petty at
the Central National Bank, and that none
OF the checks described in the indictments
mad been sent by Mr.. Petty to be cashed
by Watson at the Central National Bank
That's our case" Attorney Baker an
Eounced, when the prosecution had con-
Guided the Characterization of Mr. Petty.
Inc defense again formally moved fh3
the jury be instructed to acquit on the
ground mentioned, and for the additional
reasons that it had not been shown that
the District of Columbia had title to the
checks and drafts upon which the prosecu-
ton was based, and that no evidence had
teen offered to the ownership of the
Instruments.
The motion was overruled and an excep-
ton noted.
Prayers of Defense Admitted.
Over the objection of the prosecution the
court allowed the following prayer, pre-
pared by the defense, applying to the in
dictment with five counts:
1.-The jury are instructed as matter of law
that before they can convict the defendant
they must find, beyond a reasonable doubt
first, that the defendant was clerk in the
service and employment of the District, and
that during the period of defendants en-
ployment certain James T. Petty was
auditor of the District of Columbia and
that there came into possession of the said
James I. Petty as such auditor, in the
course Of the business of said municipal
corporation. the said checks and drafts
mentioned in the Indictment; second that
said checks were valuable securities and
effects belonging to the said municipal
corporation; third, that the said defendant
was intrusted with and did receive into and
have in his possession and under his care
by virtue of his said employment, the said