San Andreas independent., 1857-10-31
REPORT OF TIE EVIDENCE.

1t WAS proven on the trial. by Mr.. \. T. Nor
cross, that on the 9th day of December, 1866,
he was Chairman of the Board of Supervisors;
that on that day Mr. s. l.. Magee the Treas
urer OF Calaveras County, and as such Treas
urer presented to the Board of Supervisors, for
cancellation, some three or four hundred coun-
ty Warrants, amounting in the whole to some
Sl2 900 90 of the general fund" That the
Warrant specified in the indictment, for $26.67,
was cancelled by the Board of Supervisors, on
the 4th or 9th day of said month. That inter-
est was computed thereon to the amount of
one dollar; and the sum of one dollar, interest,
was allowed Mr.. Magee, on the said Warrant.
Mr.. Norcross, also testified, that the Snpervis-
ors at that time did not compute the interest
on the Warrant, because they had no means
OF ascertaining when it was redeemed-Mr
Alagee not having any Book showing that fact
| 1t also appeared, from the evidence, that the
| Warrant was registered September 23d. 1856.
The interest from September, 23d, to Dccem-
Der +th, as computed by Mr.. Norcross on the
stand, amounted to fifty-one cents (5lcts.)
| Mr. Thos. B. Wade. testified that the county
Warrant, for S26 81, specified in the indict-
mcnt, was issued to him, by the County Audi
tor, n. l.. Broughton, on the I'd day of Sep
tember, l856,-that on that day or the day
following, he gave said county Warrant to Mr.
that Magee told him Wade-that he had no
county money on hand, but would pay 1.-THE
Warrant-in few days. That witness told
Magec to pay the money to his Agent John
Hanson, as we'll as another county Warrant
drawn in favor of witness for S6l SIS. That
the two Warrants amounted to Ss8 90. That
Magee paid $8S co. being the amount of both
Warrants, to Hanson, and that Hanson paid
him-the Witnesses 90, and no more
mat he-Wade--did not receire the one dollar
interest, charged on the county Warrant.
John Hanson, testified that Magee paid him
some money, but the amount he did not recol-
lect, or the time when paid to him. hut that be
paid over to Wade, ALL the money. he receiy-
ed from Magee
The defendant then proved by Mr. SAWYER
Deputy County Treasurer, under Magee, that
on the z3d day OF September, 1856, there was
no money In the Treasury of Calaveras county
That he did not know when the Warrant sne
cited in the Indictment, was redeemed. Rut
on his cross examination he testified that there
might have been money in the Treasurer's
SAFE, belonging to the county, on the 23d doy
OF September, 1856. That he did know where
Magee kept ALL the money belonging to the
county; that Magee was daily absent in the
county collecting revenue. as Treasurer; that
the Treasurer kept Book, showing the re-
VI ~ouheJ 'diidutsy ttL1c rncn
deemed &c.
The Book was brought into Court and mt
in evidence. It showed the redemption of
Scrip, or county Warrants, previous tn the
5th of December, 1856, and also subseouept
to that date; but it did not appear from the
Book nor did Mr.. Magee prove, at what t;me
the said county Warrants scere redeemed Mr.
Sawyer also sworc that there was freopent,v
money in the safe Of Nr. Magee, belonging to
individuals and not to the county.
To the charges asked for by the counse,
Judge Porter gave the further charpes-Tba,
if the jury believe, from the evidence that tIa
defendant, S. L. Magee, acting as Countv
Treasurer (who is the receiving and disburs;no
officer OF the county,) paid out to witness
Thomas g. Wade, or to his agent. John Uan,
son. sum of money, and by an act of his in
his settlement with the Board of Supervisor
induced said Board to believe that he Maid !.
sum greater than that he paid from the Conntv
Treasury to said Wade, and by such act ~
representation, either by word or the exh;b;-
ton of the books of the Treasurer. or tho
County warrants, to said Board-was allowed
said additional sum in said settlement. thew
viii render verdict Of guilty.
# the jury believe, from the evidence. tba.
defendant took such additional sum as before
stated, Y IS also necessary for them to believe
that he did il fraudulently, or with intent to
appropriateitto his own use.
The jury rendered verdict of not guilty.
=