United States v. Hillegass

Citation176 F. 444
Decision Date27 January 1910
Docket Number31.
PartiesUNITED STATES v. HILLEGASS.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

J Whitaker Thompson and Walter C. Douglas, Jr., for the United states.

John McClintock, Jr., and A. Florence Yerger, for defendant.

HOLLAND District Judge.

The defendant was indicted under section 5209, Rev. St. (U.S Comp. St. 1901, p. 3497), for aiding and abetting Morris L Hartman, the cashier of the Farmers' National Bank of Boyertown, to misapply its funds, which section, so far as material to this cause, is as follows:

'Every * * * cashier * * * or agent of any association who * * * willfully misapplies any of the moneys, funds or credits of the association * * * with intent * * * to injure or defraud the association, * * * or any individual person; * * * and every person who with like intent aids or abets any officer, clerk or agent in violation of this section, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.'

There are 136 counts in the indictment, all alike in the statement of the offense charged, except that count 1 is general, charging the unlawful misapplication by means of divers checks drawn by the defendant and paid by the cashier of the bank, and counts 2 to 12, inclusive, charge similar misapplications by means of a number of checks, all drawn to the same payee by the defendant, and paid by the cashier to the persons named in the count. Counts 13 to 136, inclusive, are special counts, and identical, except as to the date, amount, and name of the payee. Count 13, which may be taken as a type of the rest is as follows:

'And the grand inquest aforesaid, inquiring as aforesaid, upon their respective oaths and affirmations as aforesaid, do further present that at all the times herein alleged the Farmers' National Bank of Boyertown, Pennsylvania, was a national banking association which had been theretofore duly incorporated, created, organized, and established under and by virtue of the acts of Congress in such case made and provided, and was then and there existing and doing a banking business at the borough of Boyertown, state of Pennsylvania, in the Eastern district of Pennsylvania, and at all the times herein alleged one Morris L. Hartman was the cashier of the said Farmers' National Bank of Boyertown, Pennsylvania. And that heretofore, to wit, upon the twenty-fourth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and six, one De Witt C. Hillegass, late of the district aforesaid, at the district aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction of this court, to wit, at the city of Philadelphia, in the state of Pennsylvania, did knowingly, willfully, fraudulently, and unlawfully, and with intent in him, the said De Witt C. Hillegass, to injure and defraud the said banking association, aid and abet the said Morris L. Hartman, being then and there cashier as aforesaid, then and there willfully to misapply certain of the moneys, funds, and credits of the said banking association for the use, benefit, and advantage of him, the said De Witt C. Hillegass, and for the use, benefit, and advantage of a person and persons other than the said banking association, the name and names of the said person and persons being to this grand inquest unknown, to wit, the sum of and of the value of forty dollars, then and there belonging to and being the property of the said banking association; that is to say, the said Morris L. Hartman heretofore, to wit, on the day and year last aforesaid, at Boyertown aforesaid, in the district and within the jurisdiction aforesaid, being then and there cashier as aforesaid, aided and abetted by the said De Witt C. Hillegass, did knowingly, unlawfully, and fraudulently, and with intent to injure and defraud the said banking association, willfully misapply certain of the moneys, funds, and credits of the said banking association, amounting to the said sum of forty dollars, in manner and by the means following, that is to say: That he, the said De Witt C. Hillegass, did then and there make, draw, and sign, and did then and there present and cause to be presented for payment by the said banking association, a certain check then and there in printing and writing, dated the eighteenth day of May, A.D. 1906, authorizing and directing the said banking association to pay to the order of George E. Cummings the sum of forty dollars; and the said Morris L. Hartman, being then and there cashier as aforesaid, and by virtue of the official relation of the said Morris L. Hartman as cashier of the said banking association, and by virtue of the power of control, direction, and management which the said Morris L. Hartman, as cashier as aforesaid, possessed over the moneys, funds, and credits of the said banking association, did then and there pay and cause to be paid to National Bank of Pottstown, and to a person and persons to the grand inquest unknown, upon and pursuant to the direction and authorization contained in the check aforesaid made, drawn, and signed by him, the said De Witt C. Hillegass, from and out of the moneys, funds, and credits then and there belonging to and being the property of the said banking association, and without the knowledge and consent of the said banking association, its board of directors and committees, the said sum of and of the value of forty dollars, a more particular description of the said moneys, funds, and credits so paid and caused to be paid being to this grand inquest unknown, which said sum so drawn, paid, and caused to be paid as aforesaid was then and there in excess of all amounts which the said De Witt C. Hillegass was then and there lawfully entitled to draw and have paid out of the moneys, funds, and credits of the said banking association, as they, the said De Witt C. Hillegass and Morris L. Hartman, and each of them, then and there well knew; that on the said date, when the said check was paid and caused to be paid as aforesaid, he, the said De Witt C. Hillegass, then and there had no moneys, funds, and credits on deposit to his credit with the said banking association; that there was not then and there due and owing to him, the said De Witt C. Hillegass, from the said banking association any moneys, funds, and credits whatever; that the repayment of the said sum to the said banking association was not then and there in any way or manner secured, all of which they, the said De Witt C. Hillegass and Morris L. Hartman, and each of them, then and there well knew, and the said sum was then and there willfully, wrongfully, and unlawfully appropriated and converted to the use, benefit, and advantage of the said De Witt C. Hillegass, and to the use, benefit, and advantage of a person and persons other than the said banking association, the name and names of the said person and persons being to this grand inquest unknown; and the said De Witt C. Hillegass knowingly, willfully, fraudulently, and unlawfully aided and abetted the said Morris L. Hartman, cashier as aforesaid, with intent in him, the said De Witt C. Hillegass, to injure and defraud the said banking association--contrary to the form of the act of Congress in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America.'

This indictment was found by the grand jury on the 11th day of March, 1909, was called for trial on September 27, 1909, and on October 15th a verdict of guilty was rendered by the jury. The reasons for which a new trial is now urged are 33 in number, the first two of which, however, are more properly questions to be considered on a motion in arrest of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • United States v. Caplan, 13609.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • August 13, 1954
    ...can play in accomplishing the result is to aid and abet someone at the bank who has control of the funds. United States v. Hillegass, D.C.E.D.Pa.1910, 176 F. 444, at page 447, affirmed Hillegass v. United States, 3 Cir., 1910, 183 F. 199, at page 203, certiorari denied 219 U.S. 585, 31 S.Ct......
  • Havener v. United States
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • November 1, 1926
    ...would require the presence or knowledge of the accused, Brown, to make such circumstances admissible." In the case of United States v. Hillegass (D. C.) 176 F. 444 (affirmed Hillegass v. U. S., 183 F. 199, 105 C. C. A. 631, certiorari denied 219 U. S. 585, 31 S. Ct. 470, 55 L. Ed. 347), whi......
  • United States v. Pyle
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • October 7, 1921
    ...in the instant case be correct, would have been that a fraudulent intent on the part of the banker was immaterial. In U.S. v. Hillegass (D.C.) 176 F. 444, 449, it is that a misapplication by the cashier, with criminal intent, was necessary to be established to the satisfaction of the jury, ......
  • United States v. Speare
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • January 4, 1962
    ...the answer. The question of whether criminal intent is inferable from the facts proved is a question for the jury. United States v. Hillegass, 176 F. 444, 446 (D.C. Pa.1910), aff'd 3 Cir., 183 F. 199, cert. den. 219 U.S. 585, 31 S.Ct. 470, 55 L.Ed. 347. To the extent that these consideratio......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT