The New York herald., 1868-05-16
BROOKLYN COURTS.
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT.
The Alleged Revenue Frauds-Trial of Coisec-
tor CallicOtt.

Before Judges Nelson and Benedict.
The United States Us. Theophtl,is G. Cauicox and
John s. AHen-This long anticipated case has
at last been fairly put on trial. AT noon yes
terday the venerable Chief Justice Of the CIR,
cult Court, Judge Nelson, took his seat on the
bench, assisted by District Judge Benedict. I'M
medately afterwards the case Of J. G. Callcott, J.
8. Allen, George J. Hardy, Augustus ]. Day
ton, Alexander Cunningham and Louis Fan
cher was called on. The court room was
crowded ffom Its opening. No trial has taken place
in Brooklyn for many years that has excited any
thing like the amount Of interest that this has. An
the parties BrOOkynites. The principal defend.
ant is one Of the most extensively known politicians
In the district, and from the notoriety he earned IN
the Assembly few years ago on casting an adverse
vote against his party he received the appointments
OF Collector OF Internal Revenue In the Second district
Brooklyn. 1t was In his capacity as such c0llecte
that it Is alleged against him that he committed the
enormous frauds-en0rmOus considering the short
time he was in Offlce-for which he was yesterday
morning publicly arraigned at the bar OF criminal JUS
tice. The other principal defendant John 8. Allen,
was Calcott's deputy. Allen was jointly tried dur
ing the week with Enright on charge Of executing
ment, and on that charge Enright and Allen were
| found guilty and committed to the custody Of the
Marshal pending the sentence OF the court
The other four defendants are not put on their
trial. Up to the last moment they stood in the att
tude of defendants collectively with CallcOtt ana
sented by formidable array Of counsel AS regards
these four defendants much to the CONSERVATION Of
accused, nOlle prOseQui was entered in each case,
and the prosecuting officer announced that they
of defendants, transpostion much to their indi-
| vdual taste and to the intense qualification, ne
doubt, Of the prosecuting counsel II the conviction
| of the defendants Is the end aimed at.
The following Is the list OF counsel as originally
employed how, maugre the change IN the arrange
ment caused by the altered condition OF the CaSe:-
For the government, United States District AttOr
neys Kaesby and Tracy, Assistant United States Di-
For Callicott and Allen, Messrs. Williams, Jenks
and SandersOn. For Dayton, Mr.. Gill. For Cunning
Attorney. Alto, For Hardy Messis smaD Sill and jerks.
The defendant Fancher stated that he had no c0un-
sell but as subsequent events showed he did not need
The jury panel being called, twelve men, "good
and true" were soon In the jury box: Their names
as fOllOws:-JOhn Spencer, James W. COrrs b. p.
6upos Albert e. Angel Daniel j. conkllns S %iilia:
H. Criste, w. H. Wilson, Andrew Corbin and Lucius
Bradley.
The proceedings in this case promises to present
ernment officials appointed under the internal reve
nue. laws manipulate the rich placer which the
tax upon whiskey has opened out to the lucky pros
pectors.
Mr.. Kaesby moved mol prOSeQi In the case OF the
United States vs.. Hardy Cunningham, Dayton ana
Fancher, as the charge as against them was aban-
doned, and the parties named would be called as
motion.
THE OPENING.
Mr.. Kaesby then proceeded with the opening He
said the parties now on trial were Indicted with
conspiring to defraud the government. There were
charged the parties with conspiracy in various forms.
The last four counts charged them with actuaAy
counts charged them with conspiring to DO.
The first five counts charges them generally
bonded warehouse in fraud OF the revenue laws Of
the United States and with cOnsplrng to execute
he wSsRg OF Distilled
The last four counts charge them with actually
connlving at and executing such frandS.
the tse' spirits spirits rom % bonded warehouse. 'ST The
case is especially interesting and important be.
the Indictment charges them with conspiring to
violate the laws which they, as said officers,
April, 1867, took possession Of the ofce Of Inter-
trct trio Of New York, situated in the city Of Brooklyn
The other oticer-the other defendant here
hi, Allen wnom oac0t se immediate oss e.
Collector, nominated, and retained his deputy in
charge Of the once TIL the date Of their arrest 6Or
was one other officer included within the arrange
ment Of the ONCE, A. J. Dayton, who had charge Of
laid in the indictment Is withdrawn, as he will be
called as witness on the part Of the prosecu-
relates to the tax on distilled spirits That tax is enor
nous in proportion to the value Of the article and e
has occasioned enormous frauds It is not worth
widely these frauds have extended. But wish 70
say one thing Ss proper to De said on the opening Of
1
op sna. Ss %sn rason
oicers in charge Of the execution Of these revenue
laws aid in their perpetraon. Therefore is, say,
comes where the officers OF the government are
charged with q criminal violation Of the law or con-
Utmost S sfa s sw thai sn me s partial
and careful attention and scrutiny should be given
M s i II OF os su views + % e
that public officers have ever used, In order to con-
firm ana make sure our statement Of the whole case
sprscy framed under the act Of ID March, 1867
ton thirty The penalty provided on conviction OF the
ment inasmuc6 as the principal charge Is actually
set forth In the Indictment conviction must follow
n Sm & e 81
to give definition OF the law Of conspiracy In tho
easel Conspiracy = corrupt agreeing a, Of two OK
| thing unlawful either as q means or e.
an end. The question here is, did these parties
persons on trial corruptly agree among themselves
or with others to do by corrupt action any OF the
this ndictmenti Counsel then proceeded to state the
details OF the caseiocating the dstilery Of the par
sii barrels was taken to the bonded warehouse in
charge Of Collector Caicott. or these oil barrels
reis, were frauiulently removed, and by that re-
moval, for which the defendants are charged, the
government t., was deIranded Of $4,000 Counsel
| to prove at some further length. He seemed to be
as familiar with the Internal details OF the case as
| II he had studied II for years.
| At the close OF his opening District Attorney
Tracy put In evidence the X. H. Hand bond for the
removal OF two hundred barrels Of spirits.
Counsel for the defence objected, and the objection
| was overrued by the court.
Mr.. Tracy then offered IN evidence the Henry Lewis
| bond, being q disfiller's bond.
| Mr.. jerks objected 10 its Introduction on the
| ground that IL purported TO be subsequent to the
| original offence, and evidence itself OF guilty
| intent.
Judge Nelson thought II was admissible as evi-
npth hon Vyp ~ Epn N
collector, and both apperane to the same subject.
Some further argument followed.
| EXAMINATION OF MISREPRESENTATION OF r. II.
II. II. Hand was then called 10 the stand and testi-
fed that the signature the bond was not written
by him; he did not give any bond and was not the
| owner Of any whiskey In NAV, 1867: never made any