Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-01-15
GREENE-GAYROR CASE
DemurrerS to the Two IndiCt-
ments Argued
AT SAVANNAH, GA, TODAY
Col. Meldrim, for the Defense, Set
Forth the Grounds.
ALLEGED DEFECTS IN CHARGES
Special Assistant Attorney General
Erwin Responded for the Govern
ment-Today's Proceedings.
ALLEGED DEFECTS IN CHARGES

SAVANNAH. Ga. January 15.-Demur-
,ars IN the two indictments returned against
Greene and Gaynor last November were ar
aued upon the opening of the federal court
today. Col p w Meldrim making the ar
gument for the defendants after reading
the indictments to the court These IN
dictments are Nos 476 and All on the
docket. The counts of No. 4I6 allege en-
bezzlement in collusion and conjunction
with former Capt. Oberlin NJ. Carter ana
others on July @, 1897 of the sums OF SS4o'-
OOO and S23OT T40. No. AT is the Indictment
charging the receiving of money the de-
PENDANTS knew Carter to have embezzled.
Col. Meldrim demurred on many grounds
among them that the indictments failed TO
set out that the defendants were officers of
any banking establishment authorized TO re-
ceive public moneys; that they failed to set
out when where and how the moneys were
fraudulently received and fraudulently paid
out; that they failed in statements of facts
but alleged conclusions.
Checks Failed to Show.
Col Meidrim declared that the checks for
the two amounts alleged did not show In
any wise connection of Greene and Gaynor.
On the contrary, they were drawn by capt
Carter to the order of the Atlantic Con-
tracing Company, and that in no way did
the defendants appear as 1ndorsers or col
lectors of the money.
The indictments fail to set out and prove
also, he declared, that the defendants bore
any connection with the Atlantic Contract
ing Company, which, moreover, bore no re-
lation of fiduciary nature toward the
United States, the government bestowing
no trust or confidence in it. but exercising
the closest surveillance over it. Prior in
dietments of the defendants, he admitted,
alleged their connection with the Atlantic
Contracting Company as its stockholders,
but the last two failed absolutely in this
respect.
Special Assistant Attorney General Err
win responded for the government. assert
ing that it would have been a physical i'm
possibility TO have entered into an eXposi
ton, In detail. showing wherein the work
done by the defendants differed from the
specifications and that the indictments as
drawn were good and sufficient.
Aided and Abetted.
Mr.. Erwin contended that the defendants
aided and abetted in the embezzlement and
were parties and accessories thereto and
equally guilty. The court asked counsel
whether he nominated embezzlement as a
felony or as a misdemeanor. The district
attorney replied that there were two sec
tions Of the Revised Statutes which had
to be jointly considered in the determina-
uon OF that question. He then read the
stetute concerning embezzlement by an Of
f2er of the government, the punishment for
which is imprisonment for from one to ten
years and a fine not exceeding $1,000 one
OF both.
The court interrupted to repeat his ques-
ton to counsel.
That is a question with which the
courts have ben wrestling for twenty
years" replied Mr.. Erwin
MIR. Erwin said that the question had
come up mainly upon the matter of
strikes" allowed in choosing a jury. In
later decisions Of the Supreme Court 1t
has been decided that unless there is some
thing in the statute itself to create COM
mon law felony" said he this particular
statute does not set forth whether or not
embezzlement is a misdemeanor or a fell
ony. But there is another section which
is relevant and explanatory"
The Inference drawn from his argument
was that if the charge were a felony it
could be punished under one statute, and
If q misdemeanor, under another. Upon
Mr.. Erwin's conclusion adjournment waf
taken.