United States v. Moyers

• Decision Date: 23 December 1882
• Citation: 15 F. 411
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Tennessee
• Parties: UNITED STATES v. MOYERS and others.

15 F. 411

UNITED STATES v. MOYERS and others.

United States Circuit Court, W.D. Tennessee.

December 23, 1882

This was a criminal information against Gilbert and George C Moyers, in which they were jointly charged with demanding receiving, and retaining from a pensioner illegal fees as her attorneys in the prosecution of her claim, and also with unlawfully withholding from her a portion of her pension money in violation of the provisions of section 5485 of the Revised Statutes.

On motion of the defendant George C. Moyers, supported by affidavits, a severance was granted, and thereupon Gilbert Moyers was separately put upon his trial under a general plea of not guilty.

The trial of this case occupied six days, and was vigorously contested at every point, resulting in a mistrial. The witnesses examined on each side were numerous, and many questions were raised on objections to evidence, and by the efforts of both sides to impeach witnesses or their testimony. Only such features of the evidence are given in this report as will serve to explain that portion of the charge reported here, which relates to the construction of the statute and the character of the offense charged under it.

There was little or no contest on the proof showing that the claim of the pensioner, an old colored woman named Melvina Rogers who can neither read nor write, was prepared in the claim office of the defendant Gilbert Moyers in this city, together with the proof in support of it, and was by him filed for allowance in the pension bureau at Washington, he being her attorney of record in the case there, and having also at the time an office in the latter city. Her pension was allowed and the certificate thereof is dated December 12, 1881. Pensioners in this district are paid by the agency at Knoxville, Tennessee, and accordingly a voucher was sent from said agency to be executed by the pensioner for the arrears of pension money due her. This voucher was filled up at the defendant's office here by his brother, George C. Moyers, and executed by the pensioner, in which the agency was informed that the post-office address of the pensioner was 'Care of 56 Court street, Memphis,'-- that being the number and location of his office here. A check dated December 31, 1881, was thereupon issued by the United States pension agents at Knoxville, on the receipt of this voucher, for the sum of $1,674.13, and sent according to the above direction, and was received at the defendant's office from a letter-carrier. On Friday, January 6, 1882, the pensioner, on learning of the arrival of this check, went to the defendant's office to see about it, when and where she met both the defendants. After some conversation about getting the check cashed, George C. Moyers took it from the office and made an arrangement with a Mr. Lehman for his indorsement of the same in consideration of being paid 2 per cent. therefor, to which the pensioner assented, although there was some conflict in the proof as to why this assent was given. The money was then obtained from a bank here by Lehman, who retained his 2 per cent. (about $34) and handed the balance of the amount to George C. Moyers. During the most of this transaction the pensioner remained in the office with Gilbert Moyers in conversation with him about this pension matter, and on the arrival of George C. Moyers with the money it was all placed in her hands, and she immediately handed back to one of them (the proof was conflicting as to which one) the sum of $400. The testimony was very conflicting as to the nature of the transaction about the $400; that of the government tending to show that it was exacted as compensation for the services of these men as her pension attorneys, and that of the defendant tending to establish that it was a voluntary loan. The pensioner then left the office with the balance of her money, but without receiving or requesting of either of these defendants any note, due-bill, receipt, or other written evidence whatever concerning this transaction about the $400, and without the same being tendered to her by either of them. The next day, Saturday, a son of the pensioner went to the office of these defendants and complained of his mother's dissatisfaction with what had occurred, and on the following day, Sunday, George C. Moyers went to the pensioner's house, when further talk about it was had, and thence George C. and this son went together to Gilbert Moyers' residence, where an angry conversation ensued, when finally Gilbert said he would have nothing more to do with it; his testimony tending to show that he directed his brother to return the money to the pensioner. The next day, Monday, January 9, 1882, Gilbert Moyers having that morning left Memphis for Washington, George C. Moyers paid back to the pensioner's son $100 of the money for his mother, and gave him for her his own individual promissory note payable to her, simply, for $300, and due one year from date, without interest. The note was antedated January 6, 1882. It was proven that Gilbert Moyers was wholly insolvent, and there was some conflict about the degree of George C. Moyer's solvency; the proof of the government tending to show that he had nothing in Tennessee subject to execution, and that of the defense, that he was amply good for the amount of the note.

After the institution of this case George C. Moyers paid the pensioner $300, the amounts of the above note, but no interest was paid thereon. The payment was publicly made in the office of the clerk of this court and in his presence, and the pensioner executed to Moyers a receipt for the $300 paid to her, the clerk attending to the matter for her, and preparing her receipt.

Wm. F. Poston, Dist. Atty., and John B. Clough, Asst. Atty., for the Government.

H. C. Young and Geo Gillham, for defendant.

HAMMOND, J., (charging jury orally.)

It is part of the history of this country that the government of the United States is more liberal to its pensioners than any other government. I have seen it stated, and presume it is true, that the military pension roll of the government of the United States exceeds that of all the other civilized nations in the world. It is a matter which is known to you and to all of us that enormous sums are annually appropriated, amounting to many millions of dollars, to pay pensioners.

It is also a part of the history of these pension laws, that, owing to the depredations made upon the appropriations by parties who were not entitled to receive them, there came to be great scandals in the administration of the fund. Pension agents and parties who were interested in and about the collection and distribution of these funds, under the guise of collecting fees and being paid for their services in one way and another, pocketed a great deal of the money, so that it did not go to the purpose for which it was intended. In order to protect these pensioners congress enacted a series of laws, which have, from time to time, grown more rigid. They consist of two classes.

In the early administration of the law the checks and money were sent in the ordinary course of business to the attorneys engaged in collecting pensions. Congress subsequently enacted statutes which prohibited the sending of pension checks to the attorneys of the pensioners, and a system of laws and postal regulations which have been read and referred to in your hearing, making very stringent provisions against the delivery of those checks to agents and attorneys engaged in the collection of pensions. They cannot get possession of them except by some evasion of these statutes; and the books which contain the history of the prosecution of this class of offenses, show that there is always connected with these cases some method or scheme by which the laws protecting the delivery of the check are sought to be evaded and the check diverted into the...