New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-10-29
THE PROSECUTION RESTS.

Thomas Love testified that he worked in The
Times Office in 1871, and produced file OF Inc Times
during July OF that year; the 22d 2Ath and 20lh
OF July were published statement OF the Courthouse
accounts and alleged frauds
John H. Masterson was called 10 show what would DO
the fair cost OF plas tering the Courthouse.
Mr. stoughton objected to the inquiry as irrelevant as
the matter had not been brought to the knowledge oil
the Mayor.
Mr. Peckham said the object was TO show what would
be the fair cost Of plasterng the building and IL they
then showed it vastly less than was paid it would
be fair inference that the Mayor must have known tho
bills were larger than they ought TO BIO.
Judge Brady-It seems be conceded that the war
rants were added to- and in that regard they were iae
and fictitious and therefore it appears to me that the
proposed testimony is not relevant. .,o, ,,, an
Fred g. smedey the next witness testineu' MI and
attorney and counsellor at law know MI nan anu
Mr. GaTyey Mr.. GarYey was client OF nne ~ t To- 20
remember going with him to see MI HAN IN @ ON the
3Ist Of July, it was at NO IS Duanest pr ~,
ide MIR Garyey and myself went up stairs; there was
gentleman in the hall in his shirt sleeves, ~ Des q
very warm day Garyey was IN advance 'o onid come
out he and the Mayor Immediately eano out, no
said Mr. aTyey t a w vSry have been to see
the Corporation Attorney ana 90 IlnH t ,n 20
Inc and said would better the papers; Grew
a copy Of the summons and compliant iiol up
marked TO the Mayor that he hoped the transaction
would MT make any difference in their relations MT
Hall replied that he supposed NOT that ~ was CUISINES
transaction, and the only thing thaJ MI uaINeJ 0ou
do; that was all that occurred . ,,----,--, l.,
q. What was done with that suit A. We received In
strucODs from clients not 10 press ~ anu esPoSy
not take advantage Of any default.
Mr.. Hall-Were you not madesaware that the place IN
Duanest OF the places where the Board OF APP
pOriIonment held their meetingsi A There was some
thing said about there being meeting OF the Board
Mr. Hail said he had just come from meeting Of the
Board, or words to that effect.
AMBIGUOUS TESTIMONY EXCLUDED.
cd nd
asked 10 state the amount Of the construction account OF
the Courthouse up to April, 1870 The question was
excluded under the previous ruling Of the Court.
Mr. HaI-Were You not Secretary of the Board OF APP
portonment and not of its places Of meeting
during 1911 No. 50 Duane-st A. Yes, SIR.
Ansel T. ParBhurst receiving teller OF the Broadway
they kept account in the bank In lSO WOODWARD was
in the habit Of making deposits personally:
Mr.. StOughton-We object 10 this testimony as not
being connected with the defendant.
Mr.. Peckhan-We don't propose TO connect the TACT
that Woodward Tweed kept an account in this bank
with the defendant We DO propose TO show That WOOL
deposited the proceeds OF these warrants 10 the account
OF Tweed, from which they were drawn out and we pro
pose 70 trace each particular warrant int3 me account
then that check was brought BACK ntO te COuthouso
for the balance to be distributed among the others
The Court-SuppOse this was done, what thenI
MIR Peckham-ft shows that 80 far Mr.. Tweed is
concerned and those connected with h' there was no
auditing Of these claims. -, ST..
The Court-That bears directly on Tweed. IL is I'M
necessary for say to you lawyer that nothing
can be charged upon defendant unless the facts and
circumstances shown lead 10 another cOnelusl0n
than that the defendant Is connected WIN IT, uoh
that facts propose TO prove show any COM
Deitv ON the OF the defendant in this casethOse
abstract facts alone. No fraud Is presumed ana must
be proved either directly by facts and circumstances
This closed the for the prosecution Recess was
here taken, and finally an adjournment