The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-11-25

| A. n. Williams, was written by the witness him
self the certificate Of expert. da.ea o NAY
public WAS was r. b. Caldwell, the samo TO whom the
claim professed TO be due; this was one OF Squres'
ises the endorsement on its back "For deposit, r..
b. Caldwell & Co.. was written by Mr.. James Cald-
| well; the claim was fraudulent, as the signature "a
r. Wilams' was on the affidavit before Inc witness
filed out the blanks Other claims were then glven
| endorsed by James Caldwell in the name OF Il. b.
! Caldwell & Co.. the drafts having been made paya-
bic TO the order OF that firm. These claims were
/ Is, 1860. and one for s., 04l So June 20, 1860.
/ Beng cross-examiaed, the witness said that there
were marks OF James Caldwell on the papers, eX-
cept tue endorsement on the draft; In August 1865
James Caldwell and one Smith opened business
| together as Custom House brokers at $50 Pearl
street; James Caldwell served In the United States
navy uhe warrant OF appointment was here
o Se aes se
aud also his letter OF resignation dated May ST. 1861
while he was In the service, and before and after
the active members were Richard Il. ana James
Caldwell; the latter was signing checks, endorsing
bel OF the firm.
To the Commissoner-The fraudulent claims COM
menced early in 1865; when James Caldwell left the
hrm he spoke TO witness, and lett the impression on
his mind that he had Just discovered the fraudulent
m m h Oh ese s ana Wo osa e ave my
brother James had left the hrm on that account
Mr.. Reisenberger testified on the part Of the prose-
cutlon that be knew the hrn OF Il. b. Caldwell IN
June and July, 1866, In Iearl street; went there
three or four times week; they were collecting
drawback claims for witness; understood That the
iather John y Caldwell, and his two sons, Richard
Il. and James, composed the firm; had heard
IT from Richard and from Mr.. Wildwood, their
bookkeeper; saw james there during the spring
and early summer OF 1896. On crossexamlnaton
he testified that James never told him he Was part
ner; he went To Boston Tor witness, to procure
proper certificates on drawback claims
TO the Conlmssioner-Had heard that James mad
LETT the nrm Ill midsummer 1865; did not see him at
the office OF X. u. Caldwell Co. after August OF that
year.
The prosecution here rested. General Anthem did
not think 1t needed any testimony for the defence;
but st In order 10 show that his client ought not
TO be held, he would introduce testimony to make 1t
I'll clear.
the testimony the prosecution fully proved their
case. These claims were all passed and collected
anterior TO his leaving the firm. IL 1t should come
out IN evidence that james Caldwell did not know
Of the fraudulent character OF tnese claims ana left
the firm at once upon discovering 1t, then nothing
publicly to say SO.
To an inquiry from the Commissioner whether the
defence were ready TO prove that James Caldwell
was not partner and how he was paid for his
clerks salary. After some further conversation
between counsel the further hearing was adjourned
to next Wednesday.
NEW DISCOVERIES.
Judge Pierrepont received Information that new
drawback frauds had been discovered yesterday
morning to a startling extent bringing the amount
thus iraudulenty drawn from the federal treasury
beyond Sl,O000l0. Parties entirely unsuspected
heretofore are now shown TO have been concerned
In these transactions and 1t Is evident that the firm
gagged IN the business. The names and particulars
or the discovery are for the present withheld. Mr.
Samuel |. Batcnlord was yesterday indicted by the
United States Grand Jury.