The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-05-12
BROOKLYN CITY.
THE COURTS.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT ccusr.


-r.e forEH 4. u ~~S>S,~~s~>>e>I.>~>~~~>
go 80 e UNITED STATES DISTRICT ccuar.
The Alleged ,whiskcy Frauds in BrsokIys-
Trial of Enright and Allen. m
Before Judge Benedict.
|. The trial Of r. c. Enrght and John 8. Allen, ac-
cused Of passing fraudulent bonds on the govern
ment, was resumed yesterday morning.
Mr.. Sanderson moved that the testimony OF Mr..
Paine be stricken out on the ground that his know
ledge Of Enright's handwriting was only that Of
expert, and that he had no legal knowledge OF the
Defendants writing Sections Of the law were read
by the counsel in support Of his argument The law
said 1t was necessary to have some general know
ledge Of handwriting before forging could be proved.
Mr. Halls, counsel for Mr.. Enrigh., also Joined In
the motion, because Paine had studied bonds pur-
porting to be in the handwriting of defendant until
he had become acquainted with that handwriting
and also because he was an expert
The District Attorney objected to the notion CHIN
ing that witness might identify handwriting after
that the hanwtingis that OF the party with regard
to whose handwriting the question comes up. IL
was well established that when there has been fixed
correspondence that was suf1cient TO prove the
handwriting. IT, Is .a
Mr.. Horace Cunard, for Mr. Enrght, said he had not
touched upon the question because the witness ex-
planned what he meant By the handwriting, and the
court had ruled out the evidence. The ruling OF tho
court was then reviewed by the counsel He con-
tended that Mr.. Paine was not an expert, this being
the first time he had ever acted as an expert 10
testify whether the writing was in feigned hand
Mr.. Sanderson, counsel inquired whether this tes-
timony was to go to the court to all up the evidence
so as to raise up conviction OF these parties The
court ought to guard against the introduction Of IN
SUFFICIENT evidence against these Defendants.
The court-There is no doubt about the law,
him to say he knows how a man writes. Evidence OF
this kind, however, B always open to doubt. l..
& Alderman McGratty testified that he had resided
at the corner Of Washington avenue and wyckon
street all his life; could not tell whether man
Washington avenue In May, 1867; thought there was
a man by that name lived In the vicinity.
Henry Ber6st tssed Sided that ne was deputy IN
Enright; had seen him frequently. and had passed
papers In his handwriting; knew his handwriting
shown witness with the name Of william Brown as
suretyJ Thought 1t was In the handwriting OF
he thought was also in the handwriting Of EnrIght.
The attention Of witness was called to the
signature of James Jackson, surety on the same
bond; could not tell positively 10 whose handwriting
the name OF Jackson was; could not say that the
name Of Gillen was in Enrights handwriting;
written by Enright; believed the name OF Clarence
Corwin, on form 49, was Enright's handwriting;
thought the name OF Simon Curtis was in Enrghps
handwriting; should say the name Of AlonzO Nelly
was In Enrighps handwriting; the name of F. La
Count was In the handwriting Of Enright; could not
the name Of Morris Lawrence on form 49, was in the
handwriting of Enright. s . 70 ,L''
/ Mr.. Halls Cross-examined to show that the de-
fendant had cause to commit forgery. - ~
The questions which Mr.. Halls put to the witness
the District Attorney thought was not material.
Mr. Halls said 1t was material in the opening, and
two days had not done away with the internal Reve
nue. law. ld . ll
The court thought It was not material s,
Mr.. Halls said he proposed, II allowed, to show
there was no intent on the part or Enright.
The court-The ruling VIII be the same. The bond
Mr. Hais-If this il a bad bond ia it not presump.
ton OF law that Mr. Inrignt made 1t bad bondf
There was no motive for 1nright TO make It bad
ton. want to show he had no motive In being
party TO fraudulent bond, as he gained nothing
The court ruled the question out Exception
taken.
Mr.. Hallis-Does distiller's bond secure any taxi
The District Attorney objected.
The court ruled the question out.
Mr.. Halls said he wished TO show there was no
The court Sar Cs aid moi y, t ine + Wss material
Mr.. Halls The District Attorney says In his open
ing that the government has been done out Of
$4,000 when he knows that It mas not been robbed
The court Thought It wasnot worth while TO argue
the point; A. had already been rulea upon; g.,
The COURT know the section; you need not
Mr.. Hais-what am TO doi am here 70 de
fend this man and my mouth is closed: The court
says can prove motive, ana yet Wheu uSA
question which think pertinent am ruled ou.
After some further argument recess was taken
for half an hour. $3.50
when the court reassembled Mr.. Sandcrson. coun-
sci for Mr.. Allen reviewed the charges against inc
defendants. He wished to show that, notwthstanu.
Ing the District Attorney said the nan los
thousands OF dollars, not cent had Deen Iost.
The disers had all the obligations OF tneir ponus.
Mr.. Halls said that no one ever tnought Oh mAkng
false bond, as the revenue could not DC deirauued
In that way
The crosse Examination OF Mr.. Barkett was resumed
He thought Mr.. Enright had only brought III TWO
bonds They were tobacco bonus; nc was revenue
broker In MAY. 1857.
Mr.. Sanderson-when parties came in and pre-
scnted you with form 80, and were accompanied py
persons known to you and they introduceu parry
az surety as being the party in tue BOND ana readt 10
lake the OATH did you or did you not administer
the oathS
The District Attorncy-I object. We arc not trying
the witness. ratft ni
Question ruled out and exception taken.
Mr. Sanderson--What is the bcneW of an cxcep-
tionY
The court--It is of use in prospect of new trial.
Mr. Sanderson--Is the decision OF tins court nnal
The court-The decision OF the court Is final.
Mr.. Sanderson then attempted TO show That the de-
PENDANT acted In good faith.
O. After these bonds aud forms were executed
what was done with thcmY objected to-
O. Do you understand the routine OF the Ofliccr
A. can testify to what know.
q. WIN you state what you have seenf A. saw
persons coming up and giving bonds; the onth was
administered don't remember the form OF the oatn
Mr.. Sandcrson proposed 20 show that no person
was In the habit OF going out TO see wnetner ,ne pu
sons mentioned in form 50 owned the property the'e