New-York tribune., 1873-12-18
THE PROCEEDINGS.

THE PROCEEDINGS.
Before the proceedings opened, ex-Judge
Waterbury raised question TO the propriety of be-
gunIng che until public officer could appear
prosecutor. Mr.. Peckham apparently being the only
one present Judge Daniels said. he understood that
Mr. Pcckham represented the Dlsrict-Attorney. Mr..
Peckham added that Mr.. Allen from the District
Attorneys Office was present, then Mr. Waterbury
waived his objection and Mr.. Peckham was allowed to
oen he for the prosecution. Briefly the points
proposed 10 be proved by the people, as stated bs MIR
Peckhsm. that 1871, Genet, vhiio holding the
position OF counsel procured the oertifoation by the
Commissioners Of the IXth District Courthouse Of
bill of j. Mcbride Davidson, which purported to be
goods Supplied, and also signed by John Seal
lon superintendent of the building Thus certified, 1t
was presented 10 the Mayor who signed the warrant.
Genet then ndorsed 1t with his own name and that OF
the payee. and presented 1t to the Broadway Bank,
wa!ch paid that work mentioned in that bill was
done for the Courthouse there absolute
larceny Mr. Peckham said that even il 1t was shown
that intended to that warrant TO pay for goods
delivered still the signature OF public officer had
obtained by false pretenses and that the crime
charged against the defendant in the indictment now to
Dc SrIed.
TESTIMONY OF j. MCBRIDE DAVIDSON.
The first witness called J. Mcbride Davidson, the
safe manufacturer. He recognized at once the bill
handed to him which he drew out and handed to
Me- Genet and which be again until he went
before Bedtords Grand jury no never suppileu tho
goods mentioned In the bill to the city and never got
money the Endorsement on the warrant was not his and
he not allowed to tell whose he thought Was On
Genet and Tweed IN Albany. during the Sos
ssion of the LEGISLATURE of 1871, about supply
wss that Genet told him to see Tweed, and
Tweed told hn afterward. that he would see Geost
he drew up estimate Of the cost he told Genet
aod handed his bill to Genet Mr. Beach asked if that
for the purpose of obtaining tne money for hlm
replied. 1t was" In September, wheu the witness
next met Genet, the latter asked hn TO delver the
refused bat the ground of the refusal was not allowed
Judge Daniels 10 oe stated Finally the witness had
Iienet 20 write on the bill on contract agree
meut with the Commissioners" or 70 make 1t In any
particular form.
TESTIMONY OF yX-sAYOR HALL.
The ,ext witness was ex Mayor Hall. ON the warrant
produced he identified his signature, but could
cay whether he had the bill before him at the time
not: warrant would usually reach hun with papers
annexed To it which he believed 90 DO vouchers or spec
ncstions OF the warrant they bore the customary
stamp he signed $1,000 year ana OF tue vouchers az
taohed did more than one per cent he had
recollection Of this particular warraDt ana Dill, Dut
ne never would attached his signature unless there
were bill and audit attached; when he signed war
the Controller evidenced by his signature and made
further examiuaton lie was asked by Mt Mt
proper OF Davidson, presented before him,
showing "a any yrd action hSs acted 9@y ss the fepy
there was ;ne signature Of Mr. Wiggu- the Controllers
bockkeeper He would have ssned the warrant II the
authorization of the Controller and County Auditor
because no acted his reliance On the Financial De
psrtment Mr.. Hall, when shown the warrant, stated
that the signature upon 1t WAS Controller Connolys
Mr. Peekham asked him II he was az familiar with the
signature then now. u which he replied, Ger
ta,oiy."
TESTIMONY OF DEPUTY CONTROLLER sT0RRs.
Deputy Controller Storrs next took the stand. and
stated the routine OF business the presentation OF
ol1arf5 f5of,1ca with
from Mr. Waterbury, but Judge Daniels allowed the an
swer vhioh was as follows The claim. when presented,
IA sometmes handed the Controller sometimes TO me,
sud sOme 10 the County Auditor in the shape OF
the one hold hand with the signatures OF the
Commissioners OF the Courthouse attached it, Then
tBe Auditor generally directed me clerk 10 draw the
TO the Auditor, who made an examination OF the OIL
with the warrant attached aud aAed ms stamp FROM
Inttod 1t TO the Mayor for signature who would return
it TO she Controllers Office for his signature The war
rant would then be paid by the County Auditor and
taken TO the Chamberlalns once
rant sgDed what is done with the youcherf A. After
tho presented and PAID the voucher is placed
upon die there is no alteration made i tne voGGn1r
Tue witness here shown the warrant on the Cham-
d. furnished the Ninth District Courthouse, and he
Isted that it was paid warrant When asked u the
warrant issued that bill he said the voucher was
the same number warrant he stated further that
samps Of the character OF that ON the warrant were
furnished clerks In the Controllers office MT Water
hurry moved to strike every OF Mr. Sorrss testi
no5y A irrelevant and Incompetent but Judge Daniels
refused. allowing the usual exception
tho paper in question was sisned by WIN M Iweed; q;
mont Of the Auditor all correct Mr. Beach asked II ne
could swear that the bill examined and tndorsed by
the Auditorthat the bill in the HANDWRITING OF DAVID
sou was annexed Mr. 5torrs said he could not nor
could he swear that IL the uniform custom OF MS
once to attach the original bill Of the party to the
printed bill out In the ofos though It was the
Gaow who presented the bill at the Controllers office
THE CASE CLOSED FOR THE PROSECUTION
Tina nsxt witness was Michael 8heehsn, general clerk
in the Controllers Office. He said the warrant bill, and
oeraoste were shown him. and he filled up the warrant
fom the bill and certificate before him the stamp Of
tina County Auditor was not upon the bill then and ne
nut on the stamp and everything ready for him to sign
a Henry NJ Garvin, also employed IN the ControioI
DroTe the correctness Mr.. Genets signature 1t was
oojeoted TO immsteria since 1T involved question
Beach finally told Mr. Pockham that the defense admit
ted th& Genet received the warrant naorsed ~ ana
resolved this money on IL ifon 'ho oaDA' 'Ai' A''
VIM A. Herring Auditor of Accounts in the city depart
ment in the Controllers Office IN 1871, proved hs sigma
ture on the warrant which he placed there with the
other papers before MIN at the time tnousn me h
course Of business IN the ofhos On the presentation OF
THE PLxA OF PIE DEFEssH.
This closed the for tho prosecution and recess
Vas taken. Upon the rosssembiipg Of the Court Mr..
Waterbury opened the for the defense st great
sph and after recng the points proposed TO be es-
t.bished commented on the character OF Mr. 6enet,
reminding the Jury how he had from the first fel, deep
iotsrest IN the Harlem Courthouse project. and had
made ID his pes dream. He spoke Of Mr. GeDets
Woes in the Lessture hs singleness Of purpose to
saiionng "A an instance the action OF hessrs
aud Thayer opposing alone, she passage OF the Tweed
John Scsllop residing at Onebundred- sixth st..
near Fourthsye the rst witness called for the de-
1nsa He vas the superntendent OF the Harlem Court
rse ,nd testihed 70 Gepets bringing him, In the Sum
-; isTl something less than 900 The witness Was
allowed 70 say that Genet toid a, % rns % H snt ~