The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1861-01-10

]
Whyte read the act authorizing the payment L
comm issions to the States Attorney.-The Cour
was of opinion that the papers should not be receiT
ed as evidence; the Court did not consider the com
missions received fees of the States Attorney
When the services of the States officer ren
| dered under such circumstances, the commission
| were allowed pay for extra services -
| Mr.. May then produced the book of Sheriff Gas
kins, and asked the counsel for the defence if the,
would insist that the date of April 26, 1858, was
mistake.-Mr. Whyte said they would DO So
! Mr.. May said he would show by competent testi
mony that it not mistake; and tina
Mr.. Gaskins, at the date of the receipt, wa
capable of transacting business.-After SOM
| conversation, Mr. May called to the stanC
Mr.. Wilmer, sen in-law of Mr.. Gaskins-
| Mr.. Wilmer, sworn-Am son-in law of Mr.. Gask
ms; that is receipt of Mr. Whitney; know it t.
be the correct date checked for MIR. Gaskins OF
that day (check on Mechanics Bank shown
dated 26th April, '5S, for 500 81. by defence
Mr.. Rogers could tell when the check was paid
Mr.. j. II. Rogers, teller of the Mechanics Bank
was sent for and sworn-Am teller of Mechanics
of April, 1883; have looked at the book
to verify the fact; have the book here
Counsel said that was sufficient
Mr.. May then said he had come to another
point in the case that of the expenses of the office,
the returns of which it was alleged were falsely
made to :he House of Delegates. He proposed to
show that all the items of office rent fuel printing
all going to make up the account were untrue. He
call Mr.. Boy regard to the expenses of printing.
Mr. Whyte objected; he said that in Mr.. Whitney
report to the House he had referred them to ex-
animation Of the accounts on file in the Comptrol-
ler's Office. These accounts had been audited by
the Comptroller, the monies had been paid and the
balance returned to the Treasury. Mr. Whyte
contended that the State could not take one, two
or three items and by them prove that the account
OF expenses was false, 1t must prove by the Comp
troller who adjusted the accounts that in tie
aggregate the report of the expenses were false
The Court said that the report referred to accounts
on file in the Comptrollers Office The State could
go on and show that the items, one by one were
returned falsely.-Mr. May said be proposed to
do that as he had before stated.-The witness was
then called. d.-Wm. X. Boyle, sworn-Am prac-
tlcai printer; been so for 32 years; indictments
in blank form shown witness who went on to state
what certain kinds of blank indictments could be
printed for in lots Of 200, 500 and OOO. The de-
ience asked no questions.-J. IL. b. Latrobe,
sworn-Mr. May was about to question Mr..
red in keeping two oflces.--The defence
objected, but afterwards withdrew the objection
Mr.. Latrobe continued-Allow from thirty to forty
dollars for fuel for my own Offices suppose station
cry costs about sixty dollars year; have a clerk
81 700 a year, porter Sl20; live in my own
ofiice--By deience-Think my offices are worth
three hundred to three hundred and fifty doars.--
Mr.. Pitts here remarked that one reason why they
had objected to the reception of this testimony,
that while this indictment found by the Grand Ju-
ry charged the traveser with making false charges
of expenses, yet there not one witness on the
indictment who was to testify in regard to such
charges. Was the indictment found by the Grand
Jury without having any evidence before them in
regard to such expenses?-Mr. May said he be-
heved the Grand Jury were entirely free from any
such imputation, as acting in this m at
ter without having evidence before them
He had no knowledge of the deliberations
OF the Grand Jury. He would him.
self rather presume that they had failed to put the
names of the witnesses upon the Indictment, than
that they had acted without evidence. In this
matter juror could give testimony himself, some
were LANDLORDS and knew something of rent some
were saoners and perhaps printers and others knew
something OF the dealings in the fuel market, &C.. on
this evidence the charge could have been brought
The examination OF witnesses was continued
Mr.. Waters, sworn.-Mr. Whitney rented offices
from me in the years 1885, So '57 and part of 58:
in So and '5G he paid 1925 per year; in 57 and So
he paid $3.50; his time terminated on the 30th of
April, l658.-By defence-The offices were in
Spurrier's court.-T Yates Walsh sworn
Messrs. Whitney and Thomas were tenants of wit
ness during '5S and '59; Mr.. Whitney rented no
separate office; they rented the two parors of the
house; rent commenced on 26th January, 1858;
the rent for that year was $3.50; from
10Th OF January, 1859, the rent was $780,
The checks for the rent were in the name of Whit
ney Thomas; in the rooms were two coal burn
ing stoves; there was a servant who was paid 81
per month think from $50 to $40 year would
cover expenses of fuel in those oflices--George
w. DObbin, sworn-Witness can only Judge of ex-
penSes of stationery in lawyers office by the ex-
perience in his own office thought $50 would COW
er it clerk told me it was nearer Sl00.--Bv de-
fence-keep.a clerk and pay him 81 900 ar;have
large correspondence, and he is kept pretty busy.
--Chas Roberts, swOrn-The dockets ofthe Court
show the fees to be collected by the Sheriff; for
September term, SO, witness made up the returns
and compared with Sheriff; found no Discrepancy
Witness then went on to state the number of in-
dctments found during the several terms of 1856
and 1857 In 1856 there about 1850 indict-
ments, in 1857 about 1892; the blanks were also
used in making copies for attorneys and transcrpts
in removed cases; the presentments during the
same years somewhat exceeded the above numbers;
when blanks were wanted they
ally procured from Mr.. Pinkney; the clerks Office
did not pay for the printing of these blanks
BY detence.-There discrepancy between Mr.
Whitney and Mr.. Creamer, according to q statement
made by Mr.. Whitney; afterwards it was adjusted
by witness and Mr.. Crsamer.-1hOmas ii. Gard
ner sworn.-Do not pay any of the expense for
printing indictments; have used some indictments
left III the office by Mr.. Gwinn and some from MIR.
Whitney; have all the blanks used bv magistrates
printed; don't know how many; have no account of
the number; some time during JAM, go Mr.. Whit
ney called witness attention to a discrepancy
between him and the Sheriff; it was the orders in
witness Office to have comparison made at the
end of each term, with Sherif's book.-By De-
fence-The discrepancy referred to, was after Mr..
Creamer's term of office expired.-W Lucas,
sworn-A ream of paper contains 4S0 sheets; fools
cap paper, such as lawyers generally use, costs
about $3.50 per ream; letter paper, the same; en-
velopes average So per thousand, copy. book about
81, good office book about 50 So ink and pens for
year, about $50 would be a fair estimate.
Sprigg Harwood, Treasurer of the State, was then
sworn.-Mr. May said he intended to show by this
witness that there were no accounts of Mr.. Whit
ney's in the Treasurers Office. Defence objected,
as Irrelevant as where under the Constitution and
law they could only be found on file. Mr. Whitney
returned that they were file in the Comptroer's
Office. Mr.. May said the State proposed, also, to
offer, from the Treasurer's office, the accounts of
Mr.. Gwinn, former States Attorney, for the first
two years of his term in office, to show what ere
the expenses of the office, and to make a compari
son with the report of Mr.. Whitney Pitts,
after examining the books, said they had no
objection to the books provided all of
them, for the four years, were put in
Mr.. llarwOod said, that these two books were the
only books which could be found in his Office
Mr.. Nhyte said, since the division of the depart
ment of Comptroller and Treasurer, all accounts of
public officers were kept in the Comptroller's Office,
and that was the place where the report told the
House of Delegates they were on file.-Mr May
said the State did not want any papers or accounts
from the Comptrollers Offices if the defence wanted
them let them produce them. He had gone to
the proper depository to obtain the books,
as the Constitution requires that they shall be
returned to the Treasurer by the States officer
Such copies kept in his office which is the
State to produce in the cause.--The Court said
the indictment did not charge that the accounts
were returned to the wrong office, but that the
port sent to the House of Delegates was false,
which refers to accounts on file in the Comptrol-
ers office. The Court thought that the State must
show that the accounts referred to in the Comp
troller's office were false.-Mr. Pitts contended
that the books showing the expenses of two years
of Mr.. Gwinn not evidence, whether on file in
the Treasurer's or Comptroller's office. They are
only the written declarations of Mr.. Gwinn.-
The defence have the right to put Mr. Gwinn on
the stand, to have the benefit of cross s-examina-
tion.-Mr. May said that if Mr.. Gwinn was pro-
duced, he could not impeach the testimony in these
books, except for grounds of fraud. They were the
originals filed under the law with the Treasurer,
and were legal evidence, being produced by the
proper custodians.-TheC Court thought the books
could not be any more evidence against Mr.. Whit
ney, as to making false return Of expenses, than
that of Mr.. Dobbin. Mr.. Gwinn could not
testify to Mr.. Whtney's expenses two
years subsequent to the date of these books
Mr.. May said the books would show, by compari-
son. the amount of expenses of the same officer,
which, held by different ncumbents, they are veri-
fled by the oath of the officer, as required
Court said they could not be used as against MIR.
Whitney, but could be used as against Mr..
Gwinn.-Mr. May then said that this tes-
timony would have closed the case on the
part OF the State, and it would be closed
now, unless the Court-exercising as it does in this
case, both the powers of judge and jury, deter
mining facts as we'll as law-calls for the copies of
the State. He understood the Court as intimatipg
just now, that it was the duty of the State to pro-
duce this evidence on its part. He wished to know
if he was right in this opinion. AS the Courts
mind was to be satisfied with the facts,
acting as jury, and the Court was to de-
termine the case, and as juror might call for
further or explanatory proof, in that
rnuSidarn1 utr fn 10