New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-10-30
MAYOR HALLS TRIAL.
THE DEFENSE WILLING TO SUBMIT THE
CASE WITHOUT ARGUMENT.

REQUIRED TO AUDIT COUNTY ACCOUNTS
PRELIMINARY ARGUMENTS.
The trial of Mayor Hall began with 1utter
OF expectation yesterday, the part OF the crowd In
attendance, who the evening before full Of sur
misses to the result of that days secret elaboration
As the Court opened and the Jurors names
were called more mysterious conferences took place DO
tween the Of the Mayor and the counsel for the
prosecution, followed by talk with Judge Brady, ana
this programme kept up until long after the hour
for beginning the proceedings. AT last the Mayor foSe
and said
II the Court please-since the adjournment OF the
Court yesterday advised by counsel and
other legal friends that with the exception OF some doc
mentary evidence In this case IN which argument Que
way or the other nstTnscay arises without other
evidence there has been testimony which in their
opinion the law reject absolutely tainted ana
that therefore there is nothing IN this which calls
for an answer by way Of evidence and after statng
that pass TO that waving the deiendans nght
Of being heard by his counsel before the Jury he Is Will
submit this the prosecutions evidence I'M
der the charge OF the Court.
Mr. Peckham-It the Court please, far as the prose
cution is concerned do not feel willing TO submit the
case without submitting views TO the jury.
Mr.. Buckley-Then If the Court please, in behalf OF
defendant propose to submit certain prayers ior
instructions TO delivered by your Honor to the jury In
this case. Although might content myself with read
ing them simply yet the discharge of my duty as the
counsel Of the Mayor deem It appropriate to accom-
pany the presentation OF these requests by some re-
marks confined entirely to the law Of the case and hay
ing no relation whatever to the facts except 80 lar as
reference them may be necessary to apply or enforce
the propositions OF law intend to submit deem 1t
also proper that in connection with these pray
ers propose to refer a record which think the de-
fandant has a right avail himself Of. The paper re-
fer 10 is a record OF this Court being. as am in
structed an indictment found in the Court OF General
Sessions and removed TO this Court, against VIM NJ.
/ "A f,r f1aofa 81 infrR ffa
Mr. Peckham-I interpose preliminary objection here
as TO any reference to reading part OF record
| without introducing II in evidence. Our objection now
is not as to whether it is relevant irrelevant but
TO the Of it before It is offered in evidence
Mr.. Buckey-I think your objection is mere techni-
! cal objection.
Judge Brady-It necessary to put it in evidence.
| Mr.. Buckoy-Then / offer il in evidence, although ]
suggest with great respect that tho Court always takes
as it were judicial notice its records and Of its
proceedings; and regard this although 1t may be
technically termed record, analogous 10 report OF
the caseif you choose, matter Of law III which the
people concerned, and that would have right 10
refer to it as an authority refer TO it something in
the nature OF authority bearing upon the PROPOSE
tons in reference 10 which propose your direction to
as respects OF these bills, the allegations Ia the
indictment trial as respects the very same bill
Judge BTady-That hypothetical and being so IT has
value. What does an indictment establish any more
value.
the REQUESTS TO CHARGE.
Nr. Buckcy-Plcasc note the ruling and our cXcoI-
lions. now, continued Mr. Buckley, propose the iOl
lowing requests TO charge:
First ask your Honor to instruct the jury That there
can be no conviction under any the counts charging
on nse at common law, because there is no competent
evidence OF any wiul or fraudulent breach or pcrteI-
sion Of the duty imposed by law upon the defendant
second That none Of the acts Of defendant mp
ia the indictment constitute any Ofensc at common law,
because Il part OF the duty OF the MAYOR by com
mon law to audit accounts demands OF claims against
the county -
have certain propositions TO offer In reference To to
counts framed under the statute, ask your UugOr %
instruct the jury that there competent evidence OF
any neglect 10 AUDIT the several counts OF baNey hel
SER and Davidson either OF them tat no conviction
the iurv from which they would be authorized 20 find
that the action Of the defendant Hi connected with
audit Of tho accounts above referred TO- was COM
Ncxt thai the duties imposed upon the Mayor as
member OF the Board Of Audit judicial IN their
character and In whatever way these duuc. were eX-
ercsed by him he Is not responslPe unaer lhii lIue
ucut or nder TINS proceeding unless Dis action is shown
beyond reasonable doubt to have been wu or corrupt
mai there is mo evidence from which the jury would be
authorized TO infer any whul, corrupt or c'll intent on
the part Of this defendant In any one OF ms acts alleged
nm the Indictment that IN considering this question the
ury must gard all evidence respecting any acts or
conversation the defendant not directly connected
is no evidence connecting the defendant Hall with
fraudulent making mp OF such accounts or either OF he
with any arrangements OF WIN elhet OF lhe arrange
mcuts alleged 10 have existed between the witnesses
Davidson, ana keykef, OF eltuef OF Tue COut-
f.udents, or Watson, or Woodward
Next that wllliu orcorrupt intent Is established by
the resolution. My friends the other side will OF
course understand the resolution TO when refer 10y
that resolution there In law no delegation OF sur
render any Of the duties to be exercised by the Mayor
as member Of the Board Of Audit. II was competent
for the Mayor under the authority vested III him by the
statute construed in connection with the existing pro-
visions of law TO determine upon the nature extent,
and efficacy of the evidence which he would receive for
| fine purpose OF enabling him 10 ceItty or
| audit the claims which might be presented
| to him member OF the Board OF Aunt
| IN In hat
hills had been acted upon approved by the Board OF
sneryIsors consisting OF certificates OF its President
Which in the exercise OF their discretion, they had
right 60 consider and act upon ana unless the defend
inv same as Aforesaid knew or Was informed that such
certhcaon was false, and that such bills had not been
so approyed had right TO give such weight TO those
certificates proof he saw TT in auditing and certify
ing es that the evil intent or ifuness by which are
10 he udRed those acts OF the defendant which are set
M in the Indictment must be such existed and are
no evidence be considered by the jury on either OF
the acts any Of the declarations done or made sube
ouent 10 the contamination OF the defendants acts
member of the Commission OF Audit not connected with
| the acts specified in the indictment. There Is no
| or concert of action between the defendant
| aud his associates IN the commission OF
tion 10 the effect the defendant is responsible for
the wrongful acts OF such associates, even though the
THAT Innocence and doing right are to be preserved on
the part Of the defendant who wac public otcer In the
discharge OF his duties and that therefore IL the first
duty OF the prosecution TO overthrow such presumption
that the burden OF establishing knowledge in the
Mayor OF the fraudulent and fictitious character OF the
accounts is upon the people ana unless ne Jury are sat
edge their duty Is TO acqut mat II the Jury nom lhe
whole and as fact hat the Mayor T tS SG ap
they acqu That II the jury, upon the Whoe eyl-
SSa Of II the me charges Sass aSanst @
| it Is their duty 10 aequit; Next that mas
| much as the evidence indlsputably establishes
| a. fuhau he