Hide Article Text (OCR)
A CASE IN WILCH A PORT JERVIS MAN FIGURES, How E. C. Beirne Was Mixed up in a Case of False Pretenses in Susquehanna County, Pa.—A Complete History of this Villainous Scheme to Rob an Old Man, The charge against James Page of Sus quehanna of conspiracy and of obtaining goods under false pretenses, was tried at Montrose, Pa., at a late term of court, the defendant being found guilty. It was in this same case that Mr. E. C. Beirne of Port Jervis was charged with similar of fenses, but it is said he has settled the case at a large cost. The Montrose Demo crat publishes the following history of the case : In 1884 James Page borrowed $40 from G. M. Doolittle, pawning a watch as se nity. Afterwards Page came to Doo little with letters from E. C. Beirne and John Bridgeford, residents of New York state, offering a large price for a stone quarry, of which aye owned a lease. Upon the strength of these letters Doolit tle loaned Paye $1,100. Afterwards Beirne and Bridgeford pur suant to arrangement with Paye came to 1 Sucquehanna and in the presence of Doo little offered Paye a large price for the quarry, claiming to be very anxious to buy. Other parties in Susquehanna (at the instance of Paye) advised Doolittle that he had better buy the quarry of Paye, for if Beirne got it, Paye would beat him doolittle out of the $1,100 he owed him, and he could as well sell to Beirne as Paye. Doolittle, moved by this advice and the belief that the quarry must be very valu able or Beirne would not offer such a large price for it, bought it for $4,500, giving therefor 106,000 feet of pine lumber, $1, 000 in cash, a team of horses valued at $600, and Page’s note for the $1,100 there for borrowed from Doolittle, Doolittle took possession of the quarry and operated it a few weeks and found that he was losing money very fast, the quarry not being a paying one. As soon as Doolittle had purchased the quarry, Beirne and Bridgeford lost all interest in it and would entertain no propositions to buy. Doolittle becoming dissatisfied, told Paye that he could do nothing with it. Whereupon, Paye told him he could sell it to a Dr. Smiley if he would give him a power of attorney to do so. Doolittle said he would. Whereupon Paye drew what he represented to Doolittle to be a power of attorney, but which was in fact an as signment of Doolittle’s interest in the quarry to Paye, and obtained Doolittle’s signature thereto. James Paye then made an assignment to his brother, John Paye, which was acknowledged and recorded. Tv 1885 James Paye came to Doolittle with another letter from Beirne offering $8,500 for the quarry. Beirne claimed that an examination of the records showed the title to the quarry to be in John Paye’s name, and he would not deal with Dooe little about the quarry until he would buy out John Page’s interest and show clear title, Doolittle denied that John Page had any interest in the quarry. After a long series of offers and conferences, Beirne of fered $11.00 for the quarry. Dooliittle, while conscious that John Page’s claim to an intrest in the quarry was a fraud, was yet so eager to sell the quarry that he agreed to give him $8,500 of the proceeds which would leave him $7,600 and make him whole on the quarry deal.” While Doolittle had perfect faith in the honesty of the Beirnes professions re garding the purchase, he was anxious not to get caught in any trap and refused to give the Pages any money but consented to give a note for $3,500, with a mort gage against J. K. Putnam for $8,000, as collateral, the payment of the note being conditional upon Beirne’s purchase of the quarry. In regard to this note, etc, and the circumstances leading up to it, the evidence of M. M. Riley, Doolittle’s at torney, gives the inside workings of the conspiracy by which this aged and not, strong-minded man was to be freee out of his property. Doolittle, who had al ways had to work hard for his money, was only duped by these cunning conspirators and its avarice was so played upon, that he proved a veritable ‘‘ sucker whenever they held out their tempting halt. M. M. Riley, an attorney practicing in Susquehanna, was the main witness to prove the conspiracy, and claimed to have participated in the conspiracy, in the ca pacity of a detective, in order that he] might protect G M. Dolittle from being “skinned,” he being Doolittle’s attorney. According to this story, in 1885 Paye came to him and offered him 1,000 if he would join him in a conspiracy to rob Doolittle.’ Paye’s scheme was to call in the aid of Beirner and Bridgeford of New York State, who were to offer a fabulous sum for the stepe quarry purchased by Doolittle from Paye, and while negotia tions were pending, Doolittle was to bel bled out of stote for $3,500, to get John Paye to relinquish his claim (?) against the quarry, which was a bare-faced fraud on its face, but the game was to offer Doo little such a high price for the quarry that he would sive $3500 rather than lose the ease. ‘The object of all of this was to ob tain as collateral for said note an assign ment of a mortgage which Doolittle had against I. K. Putman for $8,000. When such assignment was secured there was to be a grand dividing up of the ‘ away,” and all who assisted in the plot were to be remembered handsomely. Riley asserts that after consultation with other gentlemen friendly to Doolittle he decided to go ahead and participated in the scheme, and get all the evidence he could to convict the conspirators, and save Doolittle's property. Negotiations were then opened with Beirne and others who began to clamor for the purchase of the quarry from the verdant Doolittle and letters were writen by Beirne, to be shown Doolittle, pro fessing that he must leave the quarry at any price. Inclosed in these lines were slips (not for the eye of Doolittle) asking how the job was working. There were other steers all along Doolittle’s path, and he was about to fall an easy prey to the conspirator, when Riley, whom the conspirators claim was their attorney, but who denies it, foiled them. Instead of advising Doolittle to give his note for £ 883 500 to John Page, accompanied by an assignment of the mortgage which could be easily converted into money, as was his part in the plot, he turned tail on them and made the note and assignment con ditional upon the purchase of the quarry by Beirne. Immediately upon the exe cution of the note and assignment of the mortgage Doolittle went to Port Jervis to sell the quarry to Beirne, who profanely informed him that he did not want any quarry, and that all he had done had been for pay. Simultaneously with Doolittle’ s visit to Port Jervis, attempts were made to obtain the money upon the note and mortgage, but without success, as the con ditions Riley had appended were objec tionable to capitalists who were ap proached. But the necessities of Paye were $2 great that he went off up to Alleghany county, N. Y., and found the firm of Cnav Bros. Brank willing to purchase the securities provided they were all right. Paye got about $500 from them of the $3,500, which they agreed to pay. Page then re turned to Susquetanoa and hunted up Doran and made him an offer to sell the obligation of Doan Bros. Frank for a $2,800 and of that he would take $179 in cash, allowed him $500 on account of an old transaction between them in which Doran got left badly, and the balance he would take in dry goods. Meantime Dean Bros. Frank had become satisfied of the worthlessness of the securities, and re pudiated their contract with Paye. But Paye asserted to Doran that they were satisfied. Doran found himself $2,200 out by his transaction with Paye, and hed him indicted for false pretenses, with the re sult above recorded. The Susquehanna Transcript says the trial began August 10, and was continued until the next afternoon, at four o'clock, at which time it was given to the jury. The jury remained out but ten minutes, and rendered a verdict of “guilty!” ‘In the course of the trial it was neces sary to establish the fact of the conspiracy to defraud Doolittle, which, it is said, was established beyond a doubt. The extreme penalty of the law in this state would be $500 fine and three years’ ‘imprisonment at hard labor. It is said that Page has applied for a new trial, and under old bonds he is a free man until next week’s term of court It is a question with the public whether the Judge will grant it. It is said this case has cost Mr. Beirner a considerable sum of money to settle.
Newspaper Details
Port Jervis Tri States Union
Port Jervis, New York, US
Thu, Aug 26, 1886
Page 4
Full Page
Clipped by
Zea H.
USA 10 Jun 2026
Other Publications Near Port Jervis, New York
Port Jervis Union
Port Jervis Tri States Union
Port Jervis Evening Gazette
