New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-12-04

Il
forgery filed the nth of February 1874 and found
by the Grand Jury with the Of the witnesses
the back.
Mr. Faron testified: believe Keenan'e politics were
Democra,c the indictment for forgery has never been
tried acknowledged; he pleaded guilty TO the misde-
meanor ana was fued $780, do not think his counsel
informed, although IL is fixed custom 10 tell
counsel when the of their clients TO be tried
I Mr.. Keenan, in the District Attorneys office
great many times; cannot recall positively whether
he within the morning the disposed Of
understood III the Office that he 10 plead guilty be-
fore he taken before the Court Mr. BrttoB was in
the Court when the matter disposed Of nothing
has been done with the indictment FOR forgery.
To Judge Morris-I do not reooilect telling Judge
Morris that Mr. Brtton did not want the counsel for
Keenan, informed.
Mr.. vallader-we put in evidence the minutes "
the Grand Jury in regard to Keenans case.
Charles Gjbpey one OF those whose names were
signed 10 the document IN which was alleged the for
gerry consisted then deposedG remember beng exam.
ined in regard to forgery alleged against Keenan,
did not sign the document which bears my name, and
never Acknowledged It; Keenan, had takea contract
to clean the streets and this document which bears my
and Peter Fogerty, purpor,ed 20 be bond
that keenan, would do his work well; 1t seems that
through him the city lost 81 400 and was summoned TO
appear before the Water Board and pay what appeared
TO be my share OF the bond did MT know what the
summons meant, but went there, and then saw the
bond for the first time; denounced as forgery, and
declined TO pay ID.
Mr. Cadwalader said that with the exception of the
examination OF Fogary who could not be present
that afternoon, the testimony in regard TO the sixth
charge was closed A recess Of half hour was then
taken.
THE BADBAU CHARGE,
After the testimony in regard 10 the frsttho
Badeau-cbarge brought TO a close with the exam
inaton of James ID. Delamater. He testified: i am
cashier OF the Marine Bank of the CITY Of New-York
an account kept with us by Isaac Badcau C0ec
tor of Taxes and Assessments OF Kings County and he
had an individual account with as Independent OF the
other: interest allowed Mr. Badeau ON his account
Collector, and credited to him on his individual
| account; the amounts paid to Mr. Badeau were: Dec.
go 1868 1905 81 June 90 1862 f0 Dec 80 1862 1919 Is
s5l7 %; total s4507 &C. lie closed his with
the sh of January the average interest paid on the
average deposits wac sometimes three ana sometimes
Dr. James 6 Bangs testified in regard 70 the election
frauds in tine First Ward Patrick Nolan was Indicted
for fraudulent voting upon my testimony Nolan went
away, and came back lust after Mr.. Brton into
Office called upon Mr.. Brton and Informed hun that
it notorious that Nolan had returned be told
that ne would attend 10 the case Immediately; gave
hun the names " several witnesses, but never heard
any more OF it; stated to him the Circumstances Of the
case that Nolan had voted in the Third Ward where be
resided and that he then TO ward the First,
and swore in his vote giving as his residence place
which proved to be vacant lot Nolan has been here
since; have him from time 10 time.
on the crosse Examination he said that ne was not posi-
tive that he bad seen Nolan personally when he went &c
Mr.. Bron, aud could not recolect the dates when he
had him since To Mr.. Cadwalader he stated thar
MI BrittOn said al the time that u Undoubtedly
clear case against Nolan.
THE RAIsBECK PERJURY CASE.
Mr. cadwaader then stated that he proposed 10 take
up the charge regard TO Raisbeek This sub
stance that Briuon, District Attorney had attempted
to shield Raisbock from indictment for perjury,
knowing bin TO be guilty. by means Of indictment
for conspiracy including all concerned in certain
! transaction.
Thomas Darling; lawyer, residing IN Newark and
IN the Special Term OF the Supreme Court in which
Charles Gardner plaintiff and Gber, T. RaisOeck
to the wrongful possession oil certain mortgages the
was tried Jan. H. 1872 before Judge Pratt; ap.
OF Mr. Raisbeck il decided in favor OF the defend
ants hsoeeK 'SS'ep Inat ne pnreIased lne mort
supported by one witness, Mr.. Cook who swore
took appeal, but could not upon that evidences the
next step that informed that Raisbeek TO
gard to the case / was informed about one or two
months aferward that was to testify before The grand
ton, asking 70 see Ne be asked me my private OPINION
and the substance OF 1t was that be mat lie
had been the innocent instrument Of beating this
called to testify before the Grand Jury In proceedings
there and after getting from me the facts OF the case
asked me in reference to other persons, Bertrand
conspiracy; best recollection IS that he ayowed his
intention Of punishng Ra7beck .or perjury III accord
without seeiae Bertrand aud Cook who were
waiting witnesses as he vas going to arrest them for
conspiracy the next L heard was that Bertrand and
George W Gardner were IN prison have never since
been called upon to give evidence III any further pro
ceediDg or trial Of Raisbeck.
The witness stated that he had had copy OF the min
utes Of the first trial. had lent Il to Bertrand ana after
ward thought he recognized it in the hands OF Mr..
Brittou N the Grand Jury room Mr.. Brtton conceded
that fact and said he would account iof il when on the
had been informed The record had been destroyed
lie was then crosse kamned BY Mr, Cullen A paper
". IN M
suit which lie that the transfer for valid
consideration The administration account OF George
w. Gardner was shown witness aud identified by him,
which was an item OF s0OQ covering this transaction
Witness stated that this George W. Gardner was IN
doubtedly the VINO swore before Judge Walsh
that the transfer never was made. MI. Tracy stated
thar the only persons who could 0 used to convict Mr.
Rasbeck O perjury were PERSONS who had already CON.
mtted perjury. TO Judge Morris the witness stated
that one OF he p"peEF peiSre Judge Walsh Was certh
Charles Gardner the PLAINTIFF in the suit mentioned,
S January iS but Was no Ioasa 81
waited ;w6 or thee hours he had had no interview
with Briton; he had made request Tor the iudict
mont of any persons for conspiracy.
Nenas DAy P 2 C 2ei9nEiug to the santais
sEorn as the next witness. A complaint made by him
in reference to the case mentioned shown 10 him,
lie was asked where he cot the infornation upon
to admit that II was made at his suggestion. The wit
ness then answered that ;hs suggestion came from Mr.
ZION was to prove that this complaint a blud
The witness again asked how be came 70 make the
Information which he got IN New-YOrk and from Mr..
Faron and an officer named Burns; he had made ii be-
cause he thought his duty; he mad arrested Cook
he was going into the Courthouse and after giving
him opportunity TO see hs counsel who was attend
COok's) business there had taken him before
Judge Walsh and left aim there he had arrested Gard
about that time N the hall In the Courthouse.
Mr.. Cadwallader asked the witness n he IN The
habit sanitary policeman, OF cleansing the fountains
of justice in this way. The witness thought IT "a
part OF ms business. The inyestiga was then ad
Journed until noon TO day.
NEW PRIVATE SCHOOL BUILDING.
A new building for the use of the Charier