Commonwealth v. Howe

• Citation: 132 Mass. 250
• Parties: Commonwealth v. Sarah E. Howe
• Decision Date: 02 March 1882
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

132 Mass. 250

Commonwealth v. Sarah E. Howe

Supreme Court of Massachusetts

March 2, 1882

[Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]

Suffolk. Indictment in five counts. The first count was as follows: "The jurors for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on their oaths, present that Sarah E. Howe, of Boston aforesaid, on the fifth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, at Boston aforesaid, being a person of an evil disposition, and devising and intending by unlawful ways and means to obtain and get into her hands and possession the goods, merchandise, chattels and effects of the honest and good citizens of this Commonwealth, and with intent to cheat and defraud, did then and there, unlawfully, knowingly and designedly, falsely pretend and represent to one Emily E. Dadman that theretofore a fund of fifteen hundred thousand dollars had been left under a legacy directing that said sum should be used to establish and carry on a charitable institution of deposit for the benefit of single women and widows; that, in pursuance of said direction and by virtue of said legacy and fund, an institution had been theretofore originated, established, lawfully organized and there afterwards carried on under the name of the Ladies' Deposit; that the same then was, and theretofore had been, a benevolent institution for women who had not income enough to support them; that said fund had been left by certain Quakers who had thereby founded said institution, which had been supported by means of said fund and other bequests left by Quakers; that said Ladies' Deposit then had a branch department in said Boston, and that said branch department was and theretofore had been similar to those charitable institutions in said Boston that support people; that said Ladies' Deposit had theretofore paid to all its depositors interest amounting to a sum very many times larger than the principal sum on deposit; that the payment of extraordinarily large rates of interest to deserving needy persons had been, by the founders of said institution, declared to be the medium through which the charitable aims of said institution should be effected, in respect to such deserving needy persons as were unwilling to accept charity, and to be their purpose and object in establishing said Ladies' Deposit; that said institution from the date of its origin as aforesaid thereto had never admitted as its depositors any but deserving needy persons from a class confined to single women and widows; that she, said Howe, was then and there the acting president of said branch department; that she, said Howe, had been connected with said institution since the year eighteen hundred and fifty-nine. And the said Howe then and there asked and requested said Dadman in consideration thereof to pay and deliver to her, said Howe, the sum of six hundred dollars as and for a deposit to the credit and account of her, said Dadman, in said Ladies' Deposit. And the said Dadman, then and there believing the said false pretences and representations so made as aforesaid by her, the said Howe, and being deceived thereby, was induced, by reason of the false pretences and representations so made as aforesaid, to pay and deliver as and for a deposit as aforesaid, and did then and there pay and deliver to the said Howe, as and for a deposit as aforesaid, and said Howe did then and there receive from her, said Dadman, the sum of six hundred dollars of the proper moneys, goods, merchandise, chattels and effects of said Dadman. And the said Howe did then and there receive and obtain the said moneys, goods, merchandise, chattels and effects of the said Dadman by means of the false pretences and representations aforesaid, and with intent to cheat and defraud. Whereas, in truth and in fact, said fund had not been left in manner and form aforesaid to be used as aforesaid; and said institution was not originated, established, lawfully organized and carried on in manner and form as aforesaid; and said institution was not a benevolent institution as aforesaid; and said fund was not left by Quakers as aforesaid; and said institution was not supported as aforesaid; and said Ladies' Deposit did not have a branch department in said Boston as aforesaid; and was not similar to said charitable institutions in said Boston, in manner and form aforesaid; and said Ladies' Deposit had not theretofore paid all its depositors interest in manner and form as aforesaid; and the founders of said institution had not declared the purpose and object of their establishing said Ladies' Deposit to be as aforesaid; and had not declared the payment of extraordinarily large rates of interest, as aforesaid, to be the medium of effecting the charitable aims of said institution, in manner and form as aforesaid; and the persons admitted as depositors to said institution were not confined to single women and widows as aforesaid; and said Howe was not then and there the acting president of said branch department, and said Howe had not been connected with said institution since the year eighteen hundred and fifty-nine, as aforesaid; all of which she, said Howe, then and there well knew. And so the jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do say, that the said Howe, by means of the false pretences aforesaid, on the said fifth day of May, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and seventy-nine, at Boston aforesaid, unlawfully, knowingly and designedly, did receive and obtain from said Dadman the said moneys, goods, merchandise, chattels and effects, of the proper moneys, goods, merchandise, chattels and effects of the said Dadman, with intent to defraud, against the peace of said Commonwealth, and contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided."

Each of the remaining counts alleged the obtaining by the defendant of different sums of money from another person, by false pretences similar to those set forth in the first count; the third count stating the sum of $ 1000 to have been so obtained from Matilda Bailey.

In the Superior Court, before the jury were empanelled, the defendant filed a motion to quash the indictment for the following reason: "There is no averment in each and every count of the purpose for which the said defendant sought to get into her possession the property alleged in the indictment." Aldrich, J. overruled the motion; and the defendant excepted.

The defendant then pleaded not guilty. At the trial, the evidence in support of the third count showed that Matilda Bailey, therein named, paid and delivered to the defendant the sum of $ 760, and that in the form of a certificate of deposit of a bank in Philadelphia. Thereupon the defendant objected that there was a material variance between the proof and the allegation in said count, namely, that the said Bailey did not pay and deliver to the said defendant the sum of $ 1000. This objection was overruled, and the defendant excepted.

It appeared in evidence that each depositor, at the time she made her deposit of money in what the defendant represented as a charitable institution, called a Ladies' Deposit, received from the defendant, or her authorized agent, a small deposit-book containing in print what are therein called regulations, and of which the following is a copy: "The Ladies' Deposit is a charitable institution for single ladies, old and young. No deposits received for less than two hundred dollars, nor more than one thousand. Interest, at the rate of eight dollars on a hundred per month, is paid every three months in advance. The principal can be withdrawn upon call, any day except Sunday." With such book each depositor also received at the same time, from the defendant or her authorized agent, a promissory note for the amount of her deposit, which note was signed by the defendant or by J. A. Gould, her authorized agent to receive deposits in said Ladies' Deposit for the defendant, to issue such deposit-books, and sign and deliver promissory notes for the defendant to depositors for the amount of their deposits. The defendant introduced evidence, tending to prove that early in October 1880, a few days before she was arrested upon a criminal charge, she paid from $ 75,000 to $ 100,000 on notes given as aforesaid, which were not due at the time of payment.

The government, in support of its allegations that a fund of fifteen hundred thousand dollars, and other bequests, had not been left to found and support said institution called the Ladies' Deposit, as set forth in the indictment, offered in evidence the books and notes proved against the estate of the defendant in involuntary proceedings in the insolvency court, and which had been issued and given by her to depositors,...