New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-03-08

| claim A fictitious claim or that Mayor Hall had any
earthly reason Ia suppose IT, IL alleged that 1t
his duty 10 audit it, and that he willfuly refused TO
perform that duty. II ia not charged that he had done
insufficient proof or had failed by pretending 20
audit IL, wOuid be different onense aud not
coming within the purvew of this statute. No legation
being no averment that this clam was not one which
the c9gny Ought not to pay but simply w neglect
What that duty Why, Sir, IL appears before You
! way that cannot be questioned here .er this III
| dctnent that this account auditec this duty
was judicial can your Honor ST here upon what
testimony this audit TO take place san your Honor
say upon what proof this claim tObe allowed dis
Judge Daly-Is this argument addressed to me that
must conclude Judiciiy that thus claim formally
claim must be considered by Honor, sitting here
aud acting 1udcialy, as having been audited. 1t is
proven that the Auditors signed their certificate Of
audit in the ordinary way, upon what evidence you
evidence Nothing is better settled than Thu. that the
action OF officers high low, acting Jndlciay, Is
elusive evidence that they acted right. II their
70 be impeaehed tor fraud 1t must be specified in the in
| d ;tment TINS indictment specifies no aueeaton Of
entitled 10 stand upon the naked legation that
fused 10 sHdt this account w.llfuly. II Garyey bad
before the Board with this claim, with reasonable
papers showing Its accuracy and they had refused TO
audit il. wond that been ofense under the
statutef
What is proposed nowi why that the Mayor knew
That the claims fictitious, and what sort Of al in
dictueut should be- formed that WHY, this
that Mayor Hall, being. with Others charged with the
. against the COUNTY Of Ne%YorF, irSadnently and
with intent 20 defraud the county aud In violation OF
his duty Auditor, with fraud and malice or with
fraudulent intent knowing that the claim presented TO
him fraudulent and fcticious had, nevertheless,
allowed such claim, and thereby assisted IN fraud:
Would not that be the form Of such an INDICTMENT ana
would that under the statute which read and
under which Indictment ia framed feel earnestly
about ths-mutn earnest than should ordinarily
feel discussl presenting to your Honor any legal
dcment Is which states no raud or wrong or faut
in the Mayor except that he wfuliy refused to audit
the accounts that not charged 10 be fraudulent or
cttousnot charged with refusing to audit with intent
to deiraud but only In rank violation OF his duty.
Now, let 20 the second count. There y no ale
cation from beginning to end 81 any county haDmy ~
fact but the mere aVerIntn mat the clhin VA, R t
-ented. which claim contained the ayerineh mat UNI
was a county liability Tor work done UPON the CouE
Judge pag-Coud it become liability until II was
| audited
judge Day--It was claim unrl 1t was audited;
the statute declares all liabilities incurred previous
10 the passage of the should be audited then could
it be a liability until it passed through that ordeal
by will read the language Of the act. IL was enacted
that all labiiies neea aSt 2o s moi GOTTEN
plate creation OF Liability by an audt but assumed
sag OF the act which to be ascerained by the
auGt think the ast ssspm ~. Liability existing
dit woNS bsyS IN 56ff Of urisdicon whatever
fndge Day-The only thing direct attention TO
u The necessity existing of the ayeIiHent that this
! liability a gainst the county.
Mr. stoughton-It is not Of much consequence in my
present argument. They were, no, to audit anythins
without a liability which had b,eu Incurred tnluh
great respect il would be very absurd In the Legs
Judge Daly--It l. SO plain 70 my mind 10 be almost
obvious. what the Board OF AUDIT Tor Ihey were
to ascertain whether claims presented 10 thtn was
| liability not and having passed upon that' IL De
IN the SENSE OF the law Liability "hich the o0nei
! officers to discharge and obey. $3.50,
! Mir Stoughton-suppOse claim was presented 10 them
which they supposed not Liability would IL Dc ueli
Judge DAILY That is another az >tion.
Mr.. Stoughtonlt l. essential '" me Iu'rc 'I me IN
dictment this statute that u shOud Oe ALLEGED tat
1t was Liability incurred previous to the ~ the
act. suppose Oarvey mad pre- ,te lu.> SIi '.nu ,au
~ . hsiIitv Incurred previous 10 the pas
qud-tl lie
We viii not audit IT. would 1t not De indisTns1nie TO
non OF duty, that II IN fact liability against the
| county which 1t their duty TO audit
Iudre DaiV-I with IN the last prODOSit iOn
hut i'm nv Judgment does not affect the question Of the
Necessity of tins character III TINS ln-
dctment ior not auditing OF Tor I.l uahs 20 udlt; N!
impression is you are night IN tut assumption OF that
position that II Carney Wa the Instrument 81 he prose
rutioB for thevloauOn OF duty, II might Ice nete>-
,ary on part. OF might not, to SHOW that hc hd
! fused Ia audit and therefore the act
Mr. stoughonTha disposer OF this question utterly,
second coun in the indictment undertake 70 say that
hrst count enlarged The indictment or the
character Of the offence. which y to De determined by
held that willfu is corTupty In Now looking
al the second That that IL became the duty
stated ON he papers Or, ented for audit a. liability
against the County to examine into their validity and
correctness, Will iricndH contend that II this
gentleman had pecied the work done, lad taken the
statement Of the person Who had inspectei II, had
eter written bv Tom Jones or ay BODY else 10
effect that claim proper for them 10 audit ana
made their certificate OF aunt mat III lhc aDsus OF
iraud An onrnse could ne chatErd aghSt th'Li MIN
equal propety might be- suggested 10 court Sitting
IN criminal To take certain course In ts MANAGE
! ment. Yet who would hazard such a pEOpost0nI ILe
moment = enter upon that domain We touch rule
which relieves acting judcally from all RESPONSE
mty their cOnduct-fr0m all allegations or fraud
And a charge is made out against them, they must be
indicted this statute doe not provide for such an
oene. This section 50. which makes 10 an 0rense Will
fully refuse perform duty which may bt eI0olned
upon them Is act which suppose may not be quite de-
claratory of the common Law doubt, may IT please
your Honor II before that section officials matter
| UNA hen
could he indicted for wfuly refusing to perform them.
! n they could Il would hardly essential to pass
this statute but, assuming mat tney lsht' II NOuIo
| not interfere with my argument at all
At this point OF Mr. Stoughtons argument the Court
adjourned until this morning when Garyey Will again
| appear on the stand As he stepped down from the
stand 10 receive the OF persons who gathered
about him, he remarked a former friend: All, NOSE,
how are youf Glad 10 you old times, you know"
and in reply 10 a jOcular question: What are they
going 70 do with YOU AnGyf" responded in the same
| vein. DO Mt know hang NE, perhaps; do Mt
| know"
After the adjournment OF the Court the accused and
counsel slowly left Court house and returned TO the
of1e. OF Messrs Brown Hall & Vanderpoe, where, be-
ing Joined by ezudge Fthian, who not In Court at
the time OF the scene, they went into consultation
which lasted several hours, and which II reported 10
have been very dscordsn and 10 have resulted in no
| fYed line OF defense for tomorrow.
| WHAT CARNEY WILL TELL.
| Garyey returns to Sew-York under al arrange
| mept by which be agrees 10 give up the whole
gang and reveal the whole conspiracy from Its IN
ceptionn IL was stated last evening, that he would
not only swear that 66 per cent of bis entire claims,
| ;,oludinc ,he one on which Hall Ii IN