People v. Wells

• Decision Date: 25 September 1942
• Docket Number: No. 26663.,26663.
• Citation: 44 N.E.2d 32,380 Ill. 347
• Parties: PEOPLE v. WELLS.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

380 Ill. 347

44 N.E.2d 32

PEOPLE

v.WELLS.

No. 26663.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Sept. 25, 1942.

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; John A. Sbarbaro, Judge.

Claude A. Wells was convicted of forgery and of passing a forged instrument, and he brings error.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.Francis J. Kennedy and Albert E. Buccieri, both of Chicago (Everett Jennings, of Chicago, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.

George F. Barrett, Atty. Gen., and Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty., of Chicago (Edward E. Wilson, John T. Gallagher, and Melvin S. Rembe, all of Chicago, of counsel), for defendant in error.

THOMPSON, Justice.

On February 28, 1941, the grand jury returned an indictment of two counts in the criminal court of Cook county against the defendant, Claude A. Wells. The first count charged the defendant with feloniously, fraudulently and falsely forging and counterfeiting the handwriting and signature of Albert E. Beaurline, otherwise called A. E. Beaurline, secretary of the Bluebird System, Inc., to a certain purported check and order for payment of money that purported to be drawn by said Bluebird System, Inc., with intent thereby, then and there, to prejudice, damage and defraud said Bluebird System, Inc. The second count charged that the defendant feloniously, fraudulently, wilfully and falsely, passed as true and genuine the false, forged and counterfeited handwriting and signature of Albert E. Beaurline, otherwise called A. E. Beaurline, secreatry of the Bluebird System, Inc., a corporation, said signature being written upon a certain purported check and order for payment of money, with intent thereby, then and there, to prejudice, damage and defraud said Bluebird System, Inc.

Motion was made to quash the indictment, which motion was overruled. On a trial before a jury the defendant was found guilty as charged. His motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were denied and he was sentenced to the Illinois State penitentiary for the crime of forgery in manner and form as charged in the indictment, for a term of years not less than one nor more than fourteen, as provided by law. Defendant prosecutes this writ of error.

The check in question, dated October 30, 1939, and drawn on the Argo State Bank, Argo (Cook county), Illinois, was for $500, payable to the order of C. A. Wells and bore the signature of A. E. Beaurline. Defendant admits that he wrote the signature of A. E. Beaurline and the endorsement C. A. Wells on the back of the check.

The defendant had lived in Chicago for a number of years and had been employed by various firms in the city as an auditor and accountant and had done some work on income tax matters for various firms. According to the testimony of many of these employers, he had always borne a good reputation for honesty and integrity.

In November, 1926, he was employed on a monthly retainer basis of $50, with the Bluebird System, Inc., a corporation, which was engaged in the business of transporting for hire passengers by bus, in the vicinity of Chicago, Illinois.

Defendant's duties were to make monthly statements, discuss the statements with the president or secretary and handle income tax or other tax matters of the corporation; that he continued in that capacity until October, 1939. However, his status changed as far as compensation was concerned, the compensation being increased in 1938 to $100 per month, due to the fact it was agreed he was to spend more time in making detailed records, entries in the cash book and in the voucher register, previously made by the bookkeeper of the company.

During the time the defendant was employed with the Bluebird System, Inc., there was a change in bookkeepers and also the defendant transacted some business with A. E. Beaurline, purchasing a lot from him and at one time loaned the Bluebird System, Inc., around $500.

The employment progressed satisfactorily, it would seem, with all concerned until the latter part of October 1939, when the particular check in question in the sum of $500, purporting to be signed by A. E. Beaurline for the Bluebird System, Inc., drawn upon the Argo State Bank and payable to C. A. Wells, was denied payment at the Argo State Bank, on the ground that the signature was not genuine; that this refusal of payment was made after the check was deposited by C. A. Wells in his account at the First National Bank of Chicago, Illinois, and had been sent to the Argo State Bank for payment, where the Bluebird System, Inc., was maintaining a bank account.

The defendant admitted that he drew this check, signed the signature of A. E. Beaurline and deposited same to his account in the First National Bank of Chicago, but claimed that he did so under authority and with the consent of A. E. Beaurline.

The defendant testified that he was an auditor and accountant and had done considerable income tax work; that he took the State examination as a certified public accountant in Indianapolis, Indiana, in 1926, and passed that examination; that he had worked as a public accountant for Arthur Anderson & Company in Chicago, for the Oakland Motor Car Company at Pontiac, Michigan, and that he was a field supervisor, working in the New York City office with this concern until June, 1927; that as a certified public accountant he still has clients in New Jersey and Pennsylvania; that he moved to Chicago in 1933 and worked for many concerns as an auditor, accountant and tax expert, and was employed by the Bluebird System, Inc., in November, 1936, to make monthly statements, discuss the statements with the president or secretary and to handle income taxes and other tax matters; that he met A. W. and A. E. Beaurline in April or May of 1936; that A. Willard Beaurline was president of the Bluebird System, which was incorporated, and that A. E. Beaurline was vice-president; that he was employed by the Beaurlines to examine the assets taken over by the Bluebird Coach Lines, Inc., of Illinois and the Bluebird Coach Lines, Inc., of Indiana; that he drew the check for $500, which is alleged he forged and was dated October 30, 1939; that he wrote it and signed the name of A. E. Beaurline to the check; that he did so after he had secured permission so to do from A. E. Beaurline. He testified that in October, 1939, about October 20, he had a conversation with A. E. Beaurline, A. W. Beaurline not being present, and told him he wanted some money at that time and stated to him he had some money coming and that A. E. Beaurline replied, ‘Well, if you have, you are entitled to it’; that later he needed some money and looked in his bank account and saw he didn't have sufficient money to make a purchase that he wanted so he called A. E. Beaurline and asked him, ‘If I sign your name to it, will you O.K. it at the bank tomorrow?;’ that A. E. Beaurline said he would.

Defendant further testified that after that was done, he signed A. E. Beaurline's name in writing, took the check down to the bank left it in his bank account, but as he didn't feel right about the matter, thinking it was not right to sign his name to the check like that, he got some money and made his bank balance over $500, in the First National Bank, where he was doing business. Then he made out a check to the Bluebird System, Inc., and deposited that check to the account of the Bluebird System, Inc.; that this deposit was made on October 31, 1939; that two days later A. W. Beaurline called him up and asked him to come down; that A. W. Beaurline stated to him, ‘You should not have done this'; and that he explained how the transaction was brought about and that Beaurline said, ‘Well, I accept your explanation but still you should not have done it’; and I said, ‘That is all right, that is the reason I made this deposit’; and he said, ‘Never do anything like that again’; and I said, ‘All right, I won't.’

A. E. Beaurline denied he ever authorized the defendant to sign his name to any checks or to withdraw from the bank account of the Bluebird System like amounts to the defendant's personal account at the First National Bank or authorize the alteration of any checks he had signed.

A. W. Beaurline, the president of the company, testified that he and A. E. Beaurline, his brother, were the only ones authorized in the corporation to sign checks for the Bluebird System, Inc., and his brother was authorized to sign checks only in emergency when he was absent.

The particular check, which it is alleged was forged, was written on a check of the Bluebird System, Inc., payable at the Argo State Bank and was made out to the defendant, C. A. Wells, and, as he admitted, was cashed by him, his claim being that he secured authority from A. E. Beaurline to sign his name to such check, and which is denied by A. E. Beaurline. As to whether or not such authority was given, we have only the testimony of the two witnesses other than other circumstances in the case as shown by the evidence. The defense interposed was that A. E. Beaurline had authorized defendant to sign the check in question.

The prosecution introduced in evidence, over the objection of the defendant, photographs of other checks made by a recordak machine; that these photographs were offered in evidence for the purpose of showing that other checks had been forged by the defendant at other times or near the time of the forgery alleged in the indictment although it is contended by the People that it was not their intention to introduce these exhibits of the so-called checks made by a recordak machine, as so-called evidence of forgery; that they were introduced as primary proof of the records of the bank to show intention of the defendant. We cannot, however, see any difference here, as in either case, it is necessary that such evidence, to be admissible, must be competent.

Recordaks are photostatic reproductions of the face of checks, and recordak machines, to show facsimiles of checks, are now being used in most up-to-date and active...