New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-02

do not recollect, but it was the practice of
| the office.
| @. We're you ever asked to cut up war.
| rants into ffties, one-hundreds, tens, etc.?
A. Yes; every denomination almost.
| @. Did you have the force to do it?
A. Yes, sir; did it all.
@. We're the expenditures of the State
| then IS large as they have been since the
| accession OF new officers?
| A. The EXPENSES of the State were not as
large as they are now; still they were large
| enough.
| Redirect examination.
Question by Mr.. Manager McMillen:
| clerks he employed in his Office for the last
| two years?
A. had five clerks.
| @. We're these five clerks sufficient to per.
| form all the duties of your office. and all
the additional labor which devolved upon
| you of cutting up warrants?
| A. Yes. sir; but there was not as much
work as there has been since. I must add
| that, in justice to the Office. l think there
| is double and three times the work IN
| the Office now that there was
| then, because cutting up warrants
to-day has got to be perfect science,
| taking six clerks to do nothing else. In
| my days the work was not as large as IL 10
| to day. To day, everybody expects i've or
| ten dollars warrants. In my time they were
satisfied with one hundred dollar warrants,
sometimes fifty dollar warrants.
O. The five clerks you had were sufficient
| to discharge all your duties, including cut
| ting up warrants, sometimes to as low as
| fifty or one hundred dollars?
| A. Yes, sir.
Cross examination resumed.
Question by Mr.. Semmes: You say under
| the present regime, it takes from five to six
clerks to cut up warrants!
A. Yes, sir.
TESTIMONY OF F. DUBUCLET.
F. Dubuclet was called as witness for the
prosecution, and was duly sworn by the
| Secretary of the Senate.
Examination in chief by Mr.. Manager
Lowell:
Q. What is your name?
| A. F. Dubuclet.
Q. What is your business?
A. Chief Clerk of the State Treasurer's
! Office.
q. How long have you been in that ca.
pacity2
A. Since the present Treasurer has been
in Office.
| @. Do you recollect warrant being pre-
| scented for payment, in the winter of 1869,
drawn for coupons on levee bonds?
| A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there anything irregular about it
| A. Yes, sir.
/
| A. They were drawn for coupons on levee
tax fund, and We had never seen any before
that
| o. What was the amount of this warrant
| A. One thousand nine hundred and eighty
dollars, believe.
| O. Do you remember the number OF the
| warrant?
O. Was it paid at the Treasurer's Officer
| A. No, sir.
Q. How did you receive it if You did not
payit
A. Through tax collector.
| @. Then it was paid in receipt for taxes?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What became of the warrant after it
| was received in your office?
| A. 1t was returned to MIR. Wickliffe.
@. For what purpose?
| A. Because it was pronounced not good;
| we could not receive it in the Office.
Q. Did he return the money for it?
| A. Yes, sir.
Cross examination by Mr.. Semmes:
Q. Do you recollect whether it was in
two or three warrants
| A. Two warrants.
O Do YOU recollect whether the number
of the coupons, for which the warrant was
drawn, was expressed on the warrantS
A. Yes, sir; | think they were.
0. Were the dates, when they were due,
expressed on the warrants?
A. suppose they were, but can not GER
tify, it was so long ago.
O. Do you recollect whether the warrants
expressed that they were for bonds numbers
one or two?
A. can not recollect that.
9. Do you recollect whether the dates OF
the coupons were expressed on the war.
rants?
A. No, sir.
Q. The numbers you do recollect?
A. The numbers of the coupons were not
expressed.
8. What then attracted your attention to
them?
A: They were the first had ever seen OF
Q. What do you mean by that kind?
a. mean those drawn for coupons upon
the levee tan fund.
O. Then your attention was drawn be-
cause they were the first warrants you had
seen drawn for coupons upon the levy tax
fund?
| A. Yes sir.
@. Have you the Treasurer's books here,
or the entry in this case!
| A. No sir, it is a very large book, and
would require a strong man to carry 1t.
can procure it, though, if you require it.
Mr.. Semmes: l could tell If would re-
auire it if 1 could ascertain from you
whether or not that book contains any
reference to the number of the coupons
upon which that was drawn or their date.
l A. No, sir.
Q, You do not recollect?
A. No, sir.
@, Do you know?
A, l think it does not.
@. How do you keep your account on the
treasury in regard to these coupons
| A. The number of the coupons are never
| expressed on the warrant; do you mean the
mum bers which are on the coupons!
Mr.. Semmes: l know the warrant eX-
presses fifty, sixty, or seventy coupons, as
the case may be; but does it not say for
payment of coupon number SO and so and
attached to bond lumber so and 30?
A. No, sir, not at all.
! Q. Your book would not show anything
of that sort?
A. No, sir.
@. What guard have you then on the
treasury to prevent coupons to any amount
being paing paid over and over again
A. II never has been done.
| Q. What guard have you, l say!
A. I do not know.
MIR. Manager Lowell: This witness is chic
clerk in the office Of the Treasurer; we pro-
pose by him to identify the warrants anc
the coupons, or vouchers, upon; the Warran'
; was issued which we introduce the record o.
that warrant which hold in my hand. 1t Ii
the record of the issue of the warrant No
7O71, dated December %, 1868. 1t has been
obliterated, but think l am able to state
what the original entry was. We now ASK
for an order upon Mr.. Wicklife to produce
the warrant, and the coupons upon which
that warrant was issued. / will state, MI
Chief Justice, that we have proved by this
witness, that this particular warrant was
received by Mr.. Wciklitfe, and that NJ