The New York herald., 1873-12-24


new departments were being created; there was
an auditing OF city accounts going on at the same
time; from Nay to october there were very large
his signature ior. ever tl,oo00OO, for 100000, for
s25ooo0, for 100000; there was nothing unusuai ~
Mayor for signature; the vouchers, with
the warrants attached in bundles. were sent
by the Comptroller's messenger 70 the mayor ays
Tor signature; sometimes the Mayor signed
them at once. and returned them 10 MN oy
the same messenger, and sometimes were retained
there were sometimes several hundred sen: at
once; there waa no special time LOT senuing tnem
generally they were sent 70 ms ovc n M ts
Mayor and myself when we looked ~ the
vouchers, was their regularity; they were n the the
same form as those preserved; each had on II the
Comptroller's own certificate.
TO MIR. Peckham-The robbery OF the vouchers
troler 70 see tue vouchers; the Auditors duty WAS
to examine the audit and alter the proper BOARD
had audited It to stamp them as correct ana tnen
send them TO the Comptroller; Watson was ap-
pointed by the Comptroller under ordinance oi the
supervisors; all the papers Of . voucher except
the warrant was pinned on.
Mr.. Hall here admitted that under the tax levy
Connolly, who had been elected for the whole o. OF
May 1870. Under the charter OF 1857 the ordinances
OF the supervisors had to be approved by the
EXAMINATION CoSriNUHD.
There had been great number Of appropriations
for the Court House or lor the completion ol the
1871 had been exhausted; including the amounts
paid out oa these 'county liaDiliries," between
900 and $0 600 900 was paid out for the Court
House; all the other warrants were on bills audited
by other persons than the Mayor; the Mayor was
member Of the firm OF Brown, Hail 4 vanaespoei,
was retained by the city as counsel In several
cases; the hrm had been counsel to the Sheriff
many years; they were counsel for the boards OF
Education and Health and the Commissioners Of
Charities and Correction.
The Court here took a recess
AFTER RECESS
Mr.. Storrs re-cross-exam!natton was resumed,
and, in answer TO MI Halls questions. he testi-
appointed at the instance OF Mayor Hall; the ap-
preparations Tor the Court House ran through the
S 0pdSk GuntGer and
only; the Mayor had to counteTsign every bond OF
the city, and there was a large number Of them |;
his firm mad been in the employ Of the departments
before he became Mayor.
TESTIMONY OF Ex-AUDTToR LYNBs
stephen @ C. Ly1s g. souny
was the next witness. He explained the regular
course OF bill; that 1t first came to MIN, where
warrant according to the nature OF the bill and
gave IL TO the Auditors when next he saw II AL the
sisnatures @ we were ana ne entered y I'm IN t9e andi.
was duly transferred to the other accounts.
MI Lynes was then shown the Garyey warrants,
AMI testified that he flied in all the 81 warrants
from vouchers before him similar to those
MIR. Pecgham here offered other warrants for
similar Identification. when Mr.. stoughton sug.
gestcd that the defence did not require proof Of
the TACT il all were in Mr. Lynes' handwriting.
ject OF this indictment were in Mr.. Lynes' hand
writing. hut some others belonging to the same
account were not In his writing
MIR. Stouehton at once admitted his stateme Mt
as true.
Mir. Lynes resumed The interest calculation is
III my handwriting, and was made before the
certificate, which covers the gross sum, was made
OUT; know OF no meeting of the Board Of Audit.
CROSS EXAMINED.
To Mr. Hail. county bOrkseeDer about IL
years, always attached to the county bureau; dur.
ing the passage OF these papers through my hands
there was nothing tnat led me to suppose them
iraud they came to me through the regular
channels. ana | supposed they were all corIect;
in the audit book; 1t has nothing to do with this
cerlidcate reached the oflce on the morning
after the robbery. about ten g O'Clock; there were
gone except those which happened to be in the
hsnds OF Tie Copying CLERK: the practice OF having
an affidavt to bills was not observed in 1869 nor
even in 1888; the number on the warrant Is
check number to the number on the audit pook;
1t showed the nomoer OF county or city warrants
issued TO date.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN H. xgYsER
When John L. Keyser was called Mr.. Hall OBJ
he was present or knew how the bills were made
up, and the charge being, not that the bills were
maximum or minimum 1 ont t,oda., t1as, whether
leced 10 audit them.
MIR. Tremain replied tnat this objection was made
on the first trlal to obviate which new indict-
ment was passed, IN which the ialsity OF the bills
was alleged. The prosecution in proving that
defendant did not audit were at liberty to snow
the faisiy OF the bills as proof that the Board did
not audit them.
Mir. Stoughton sad they offered no objection to
any PROOF connecting with the fraudulent auditing
contained under the fourth count, OF which they
had heard nothing IN the opening On the three
refusing to perform duty. justice OF the peace
refusing to take an AFFIDAVIT was guilty Of the
offence, though there was no fraud IN the case. II
would be inconsequential whether Keyser'5
bill was just unjust Mr.. Hall refused to audit
1t. In the case Of The People vs. Stocking the
Court Judge Danieis) held that an officer exer.
cisng judicial functions cannot be held liable ex-
cept ior fraud. In that case 1t must be proved
that the defendant acted with knowledge that
the bills were fraudulent or the proposed
evidence was inconsequentia The prosecution
were confoundlng the liability for frauduenty
mon law. with wiiul neglect OF auditing under
the statute One was no audit and the other an
audit by corrupt means peryerting the judicial
bug as friend, he never stroye to keep out any tes
timony connecting the defendant with fraud
uent knowledge OF the bills; but the prosecution
did not propose to prove such knowledge. The de-
fendant. therefore, could not be liable Tor the
addition OF 80 per cent to Keyser's bills, OF which
Judge Daniels SAID ne would receive the proof In
the point OF view that II the defendant had per.
formed the duty imposed upon him by the law
OF 1870, 10 audit the accounts he would have dis
covered their spurious character.
Mr.. Keyser then testified that when he presented
his bilis in the Comptrollers once ior payment
thoy consisted OF old bills which had been before
the Board OF SUPERVISORS, and new oneS all made
into new bills; Woodward and Watson were pres
ent when he made out the bills and SO per cent
was added to the aggregate after he got through
with them.
CROSS-ExAMNED.
On cross-examlnation by Mr.. Stoughton the wit
ness said he was seven years waiting for his money
and thought he was not doing dishonest thing in
adding 50 per cent to pay him 1or his care and
trouble and anxiety; he made out the bills care
fully, and no mortal could know, except the two
persons assisting him In making out the bills that
the 33 per cent Was added; he still thinks he acted
fairly
To Mr.. Hall--I was contractor with the city; my
reputation was fair and honorable; the Mayor had
reason to presume he was acting with fair and
honorable man; did my best 10 conceal the TACT
that was the founder OF large private charity
up town, but suppose 1t became known; don't
allow now tnat the bills are fictitious, and would
feel justified in doing IL over again; was 80 years
In business in the city; many OF these bills were
before the Supervisors and some were presented
at the Finance Department, and was pressing Tor
payment and knew Mr. Woodward as Clerk OF the
Supervisors.
To Mr. Peckham-S0me OF these were old bills,
and they were all made for 1859; don't think any
than audifpd. cent added