The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-03-06
NJ AY OR H ALL.
THE CASE BROUGHT TO A DEAD STOP.
Arguments 70 Be Made To-
to Close the Case.
What Does the Indictment Charge !-The Judges
Ruling a. to the Warrant-Plenty Of
Talk, but Little Progress.

0uUu8 a. 70 the W0rT0ut-TlcULy O1
Talk, but Little Progress.
the trial OF Mayor Hall was continued yesterday,
bat will be seen by the report. most Of the time
was spent In arguments between counsel, and but
hGtle progress has peen made The Court room was
NOT greatly crowded. and the interest OF the public
n the case seems to be subsiding The reason for
this is not 30 much from lack OF public interest In
the event, and as TO how II may AFFECT so popular
chief magistrate as Mayor Hail. but from sort OF
settled conviction that the case will never 60 to the
jury, and consequent thereon that the Grand San
hedrim OF seventy should have first directed their
shafts at weaker game. In endeavoring to take
down quarry beyond the flight of their Destdirected
and neetes arrows, 1t Is being generally admitted
that they have lost their opportunity to effect any
thing through the courts as against other indicted
city officials
TIE ACCEPTANCE OF THE WARRANT AS EVIDENCE.
At The opening OF the Court yesterday Mr. Peck
ham, for the prosecution, referred to the accept
ance by the Court Of the original warrant on the
previous day as evidence.
Ar. Burrill, for the defence, said that II the war
rant were admitted at all it should be for the con-
science Of the Court for Its inspection alone, and
ought not to be read as evidence In the cause.
Mr.. Stougnton had examined number OF cases
bearing on this question, among tnem the case OF
the People against Johnson, in which the principle
was established that evidence presented TO the
Court for the purpose Of establishing the loss OF an
instrument, as preliminary to introducing proof OF
It's contents was not evidence to 60 to the jury.
Judge Daily said he had read the case, and did not
20 understand it. He did not know in what way
the testimony given could be severed from the other
testimony; but he admisted the correctness of the
rule that the Court alone was to pass upon the
on Oft No no a
declare whether secondary evidence would be adj
United.
Mr.. Stoughton asked His Honor to listen at that
stage OF the trial to an argument as 10 the compe-
tency OF evidence under the indictment, which
necessarily brought up the question: "What is the
OFFENCE charged9"
Mr. Tremain maintained that such discussion
would be out OF order, opinion in which the
Court conceded.
The warrant was accepted as evidence simply to
the Court by the Judge. 10 which the defendants
counsel excepted
Mr. Stephen c. Lynes. County Auditor, was the
first witness examined, as f0llows:-
O. We're warrants Of that description used to pay
any other claims than those purporting 10 have
been acted upon by this Board Of Auditp A. There
was only one kind OF warrant to pay all accounts.
O. Look at that warrant again. A. The account
for which the warrant was drawn is expressed in
the margin
Q. We're warrants having the words County Ii
aoities printed at the end used for any other pur-
pose than to pay claims passed by the Board of
Audit A. No, SIR.
o At what period In the routine Of business was
your signature written on the warrant as register.
ing ~ A, %t the time entered it in the audit
@ At that time were the papers known as
voucher and also the warrant in your possession
Q. Did You personally keep the record in book
Of county vouchersY A. Yes. sir.
@ kPrOducing some bO0ks.) Please identify the
book In which such record was kept. A. Showing
the bo0k) This Is it.
q In what pages In the book was that record
keptP A. 467, 46S and 469.
4. Was that account begun ana finished wnen It
purp0rts to have beenP A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the entries made on the dates when they
Durport to have been made? A. Yes, sir.
q. What DO those dates refer to 7 A. To the dates
when the record was entered in the audit book.
Witness also explained the remainder OF the record
rs indicating the amount OF the warrant. to whom
payable, the nature OF the claim and the number OF
the vouchers
Q. what does the figuring under the head Of ire
marKsn on page 469 descrbe2 A. 1t expresses the
aggregate amount or the accounts on that page
z. VIII you state from what the entries In the
''lor WHAT column were copled-whether from the
vouchers or the other book or the warranty A.
From the original bOok-the audit book.
Q: Referring to the audit book, No. 81. page 1863,
under the heading "County Liabilities from what
were the entries copled2 A. From the warrant.
Q. These figures IN the audit book. under the
shIng except the second bo0k9 A. They refer to
the vouchers; the number IS put on the warrant
book NUMBER Is put In first.
9. Look at the warrant-how do you get the
Information under the word "i0r a' A. From the
voucher.
q. You mean the bundle OF papers, complete ex-
cept the receipt or the paryP A. The character Of
the work Is expressed the outside of the voucher
which IS all complete then except the receipt
q. Who made the endorsement on the outside of
the voucher? A. Sometimes did II and sometimes
the County Auditor.
Q. How did you do iti A. BY examining the
in the case Of this PARTICULAR lar entry did Won or
Mr.. Watson endorse the vouchers A. cannot say,
@ Did you draw any warrant except upon
O. was there any record in the audit book or,
the record book, except there was voucher and
Cr0ssexamined by the defence-Q. is the record
OF vouchers IN the record book No. a transcript
OF the audit book No. 81 A. Yes. sir.
q. Are or are not the entries which are made in
audit book NO copied from the warrant also made
@. SO the warrant gives all the information that
the audit book does IN regard TO any particular
sransactions A. Yes, SIR.
y. In the ordinary course OF business did you not
NIL up warrants whenever instructed to do so by the
County Auditor9 A. Yes sir.
Q. Was the blank form 10 which the bill Of the
creditor was attached SO attached by the County
Auditor? A. Yes, Sir.
O. That blank had a printed endorsement on the
outside containing blank spaces for the insertion OF
Inherent particulars relating TO the bill to which 1t
q. And among otner blank spaces, was there not
blank for condensed statement Of the Character
OF the bilP A. Yes, sir,
O In the ordinary course Of business, diu not the
County Auditor himself I'LL up these blank spaces2
A. He generally did II.
Q. When one Of these packages called vouchers
came 10 you, this blank with the spaces for the
endorsement, was the outside paper9 A. Yes sir :,
O. And wnen that outside paper was filIed no by
the Auditor and contained statement OF the gem
eral character OF the account did you draw the
warrant from the endorsements A. Yes, sir
q. And did not In sucn cases examine the papers9
A. No, sir; assumed his endorsement to be cor.
rect.
O. This stamp OF the County Auditor; was II not
impressed on the lace OF the endorsements A.
Yes, sir. ,
o. You nave stated that IN some instances YOU
yourself filed up the endorsement When you did