The New York herald., 1868-05-24
were not two persons present representino them.
aalv

were were no. TWO persons present representing them
Mr.. stoughton objected. Objection sustained.
Cross med, ey Mr. Tracey-witness had no
he saw him about his appointments; understood that
he was to have place In the Office from Mr.. LANES
M. Tornine, Of Tennessee cannot tell how the hand
bond was entered out OF its order; donot rememher
swearing before the Grand Jury that he did NOT enter
that bond because 1t was absent in New York
Transportation order was handed to witness who
said that the alteration of the date from the 2lh TO
the 10th was in his handwriting and that he made it
nj Ss 'ne Of the aans ns whReS Ss
Do not remember having said that he had
not made the alteration; witness explained
how he made the mistake with regard TO
the alteration in his testimony before the Grand
Jury; it was not arranged between witness and Day
ton to 70 execute set OF papers to cover the ~ bar
asked for set Of blank forms for transportation
bond; know that there never was any return III"
made at the office by Backus for the IN barrels,
q; What business are you in now Mr.. De Veau'
A. None, thanks to you.
say sir that have good reason to believe that you
prevented my being appointed inspector.
The defence here rested.
OF the act or 1866, and stated that CacOtt was
responsible for The disiers' bonds in the office, and
that whether they were executed before Mr.. Allen
or not did not make any difference. That section
imposed on the Collector duty which he could not
reheye himself from by assigning to deputy:
etter from DEFENDANTS letter book, testified to
by Joseph G. Ward when he said he carried a letter
from Mr. Callicott to Mr. A. J. Dayton requesting his
dence. 1t Is claimed to fix the date
Abstracts OF a circular letter issued by the Com
missioner OF Internal Revenue to Mr.. CalIicott
dated May 49, 1867 and received May Is, was here
read and admitted 1t calls attention to enormous
frauds in Cacotts district and discusses the neces-
sity OF having them attended to.
The evidence was here closed on both sides.
The court then adjourned until Monday, at noon,
when the arguments of counsel will be submitted.
The Case OF j. G. Braine, the Alleged Con.
federate Pirate.
Before Judge Benedict.
The United States Us. John c. Brdine-In this case
an application was made in court some days ago TO
admit the accused to ball. Judge Benedict reserved
opinion, and yesterday morning decided against the
application. He said having considered the ap-
plicatiOn, which to admit the defendant to
bail In small sum, he had to say that the
prosecution is founded on an indictment for
murder. The defence ia that the offence was
Of the Confederate rebel navy, the offence charged
being the murder OF an officer OF the Chesapeake
steamer plying at the time between New York and
Portland. The accused has been in confinement
many months, and the application now Is to admit
him to bail in small sum- on the ground that lie is
unable to procure witnesses TO prove In his behalf
that he (Braine) was acting IN the matter OF the
offence charged under regular commission. II was
not very clear from the aidavits put in the part
OF the defendant how his release bail would enable
him to procure the attendance Of witnesses. The
court, however, would be inclined to accept bail in q
sum that would ensure the defendants attendance
the trial, but he did not feel justified in admitting
party charged with murder to bail in the small
the motion, with liberty to renew the application
whenever it should be made setting forth an amount
OF BAH to ensure the attendance of the prisoner
take his trial whenever the case might be called