Stallings v. State

• Decision Date: 29 November 1890
• Parties: STALLINGS v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

15 S.W. 716

STALLINGS v. STATE.

Court of Appeals of Texas.

November 29, 1890.

Appeal from district court, Coryell county; C. K. BELL, Judge.

This conviction was for embezzlement of money exceeding $20 in value, and the penalty assessed was a term of two years in the penitentiary. It appears from the record that the defendant's agency for the Singer Manufacturing Company commenced on June 21, 1888, and terminated in January, 1890. The prosecution was for the embezzlement of funds of the company coming into his hands as agent, and the amount set out in the indictment as the amount embezzled was the amount the company claimed he was indebted to it at the termination of his agency. The transactions which go to make up this balance cover the entire period of the defendant's agency. The state introduced in evidence a statement showing machines sold and collections made by the defendant for the company. Upon this statement, as subsequently explained by prosecuting witnesses, the defendant's arrearage to the company was $286. But, as testified by the said witnesses, the defendant was entitled to credits which reduced the actual amount of his indebtedness to $154. This statement bears the following indorsement by the defendant: "I hereby certify that I have made the above collections, and received the amounts in cash or its equivalent on the above-described machines and list of collections shown in this report, for which I have failed to account to the Singer M'f'g Co. at their branch office in Dallas. This March 7, 1890. J. P. STALLINGS. Witness: J. T. HALBROOK." It may be noted that the said statement exhibits 32 transactions or items, none of them bearing date, and ranging in amount from $2 to $45. The state's witnesses (the company's managers at the Dallas branch office) testified that the amount of shortage was ascertained by subtracting the credits to which the defendant was entitled from the sum of his indebtedness, as shown by the books in the company's office. None of them would vouch for the absolute correctness of the statement in evidence, but at the time he signed the statement the defendant agreed to settle with the company on the basis of the said statement. The defendant's remittances to the company from time to time were credited to him on the books. The witnesses could not say how far back from January, 1890, the transactions shown in the statement extended; nor could they say that the defendant ever received or collected as much as $20, or as much as $5, at any one time. It further appears from the state's evidence that when the statement showing the defendant to be in arrears to the company in the sum of $286 was first exhibited to the defendant he protested that it was incorrect; that he claimed he did not owe that amount to the company; and that he had not been allowed the credits to which he was entitled. It was further shown that at the final settlement on the basis of the said statement the defendant, before he signed the acknowledgment to the same, claimed that he was entitled to certain credits which he was...