Com. v. Mead

• Citation: 160 Mass. 319,35 N.E. 1125
• Parties: COMMONWEALTH v. MEAD.
• Decision Date: 04 January 1894
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

160 Mass. 319

35 N.E. 1125

COMMONWEALTH v. MEAD.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Essex.

January 4, 1894

This was an indictment charging the defendant with the embezzlement of $1,000 of money alleged to be the property of Jane Mooney and Mary Mooney. Before the jury was impaneled, the motion to quash the indictment which was on file was renewed, and overruled by the court, whereupon the defendant excepted.Jane Mooney, a witness for the commonwealth, testified that in September, 1885, a deposit of $1,000 was made in her name in the Danvers Savings Bank; that $500 of this money was hers, and $500 belonged to her sister Mary Mooney; that in October, 1887, she was taken sick with paralysis, and was at the Salem Hospital for about three months; that she had no knowledge of the money being taken from the bank; that she signed no order to have the money taken, and authorized no one to withdraw the money, or in any way to exercise any control over it. Mary Mooney, a witness for the commonwealth, testified that at the time her sister was in the hospital she was very sick, and the witness did not expect her to recover; that at one time she (Mary) suggested to her sister that it would be well to withdraw the deposit from the bank in order to secure it more effectually but that her sister refused to talk about it; that the subject was never afterwards mentioned between them; that Jane Mooney gave her no authority to withdraw money, nor to make any arrangement with any one as to holding the money for the benefit of any one; that she had a conversation with the defendant in which she told her that her brother's wife had said that her brother was going to attach the money; that the defendant produced an order; that the witness signed the order, as a witness thereto; that she and the defendant went to the bank, and withdrew the money which was paid to the defendant in bills; that she and the defendant went away from the bank together; that the defendant paid over the whole of the money to her; that she kept it for a day or two, then gave it back to the defendant telling her to keep it for the benefit of herself and her sister; that she afterwards went with the defendant to the Salem Savings Bank; that the defendant then deposited the money in her own name in the Salem Savings Bank; and that nothing further was said between them in relation to the terms by which the money was to be kept by the defendant. This witness also testified that, before withdrawing the money from the Danvers Savings Bank, her sister Jane had given her the key to her trunk, which was in the defendant's house; that she unlocked the trunk, and took from it the Danvers bank deposit book, in which the $1,000 was entered, and took the same to the bank with the defendant. There was evidence offered by the commonwealth tending to show that, soon after said money was received by the defendant, she married, and went to California, without informing either Jane or Mary Mooney of her marriage, or of her intended moving or whereabouts in California; that the money was subsequently demanded of the defendant in California, who could not pay it because it had all been expended. The defendant testified that during the sickness of Jane Mooney she was frequently at the hospital, and had various...