New-York tribune., 1873-12-25
ADDRESS OF Mr.. sTOUGHTON.

At 10 o'clock the counsel for Mr.. Hall an
nonnced there would be witnesses called for the
defense and Mr. SoughtoD without further delay. began
e. sun mp the Mayor He said that as the counsel
for he prosecution did not intimate in any way that
Mr.. Hall was connected with these frauds which men
had had the hardihood cOncoc intending TO deceive
the Mayor, TO their degradation and guilt, the
defense had come 10 the CONCLUSION that
to place evidence before the Jury
there had been proof any suggestion even that
sdch q connection existed they would have answered
such suggestion and such proof with evidence but the
case had been narrowed down to "a question whether
Mt Hall was technically guilty OF neglect and for this
he indicted and charged with IS ohenses on each
o which he could be sentenced 10 year Imprisonment
aud fine Of s25O-the punishment of a lifetime! Mr.
soughlon SAID he believed however that the jury had
already to the conclusion that the Mayor had not
been guilty any fault They had intended
10 move for direction TO acqut but Mr. Buckley, who
was 10 make the motion. had left il to him, aud no
should embody il in his address and 50 save time.
Judge Daniels interrupted TO say that the counsel
must not consider himself in way limited AS to time
Mr. Stough,on disclaimed intention OF shortening
the case 10 the prejudice OF justice He then resumed.
with brief description Of MI. Halls position in the
community before he became Mayor. He was II
years Dstrci-AtOrney and his conduct was rreproach-
able Never was he in all that time guilty. OF oppres-
son lie led a stainless official life You will search
the past IN vain for gle uterance to the prejudice of
Ie even mis- youth eulmnated i'll the attainment of
the high Office OF Mayor Of this great city. new
government was launched ON the city. New depart
neuts were ADDED. Imagine his position in the sprng
OF that year organizing these departments. He went
on and in the of 1871 the public were startled
10y the publication that great frauds were committed
upon the city.
What then did Mr.. Hall do He at once called upon
the CONTROLLER spprehensve that foundation might
exist for these charges What did ne do He appointed
committee " investigate these accounts half the com
m,ttee responsible taxpayers the other half ofcais
and to he proposed 10 submit all these accounts
Did he feel guilty did he not feel innocent as any
OF YOU The committee were to meet on Monday, and
on the Sunday before II the vouchers that were In
their accustomed place were stolen. What then
did he dol He advised Mr.. Connolly to
resgn thus inviting the hand OF every connected
with these frauds TO be raised against ham he went on
doing duty Mayor. but he was accused, he was
tired sl the evidence was put on, and what then ap.
pesred That not dollar OF this money stained his
hand The counsel thought that trial should
been revived and brought again at the close OF the
old year and the beginning Of the and when all is
peace But door had again been thrown open wide
60 admit all the evidence the prosecution could give aud
the before them. The defendant had suf'
fered for the innocent suffer keeny and those near and
dear 70 them trusted In God all that was over.
Counsel has read decisions holding that officer
ercsng his judicial discretion though he may decide
wrongly yet there Is fraud he is not responsible,
aud that every public officer Is presumed 70 act In obe
dence TO duty until the contrary ia proved. He In
sisted that before the defendant could justly be called
account 1t should be shown that he wilfully and
Inaicously perverted his Office, and crlminally neg
lected TO perform his duty. lie called attention TO the
section OF the act under which the indictment was
brought, charging wiltu neglect TO audlt lie then
and sad they were not empowered 10 call WIZ
nesses. but everything was left 70 their ais
an honest man known to the Mayor fifteen years,
was TO present bill, honest D what proof should
they take Who could measure III lloges were 10
measure It, they difer what would be crime in one
court would lie innocence another What should the
Mayor have done when these bills came before HIM
send around experts and ascertain much was paid
this and mnch for that 1t easy TO be wise
after the fact. III that poor Emperor VINO was deceived
INTO DeiioVhg tuat hls armies were properly equpPeu
wisdom after the tact"
only bills that he believed DO honest on theory
could lao be convicted The three first counts
founded the allegation that the auditors refused 10
audit the fourth charges corrupt peryersOn OF Office
a allowing aud certifying bills which they knew 20 be
fraudulent but he believed the prosecution did not
Mr. stDnehlon proceededt discuss the evidence which
the Mayor had as TO the honesty Of the bills and
scrbed Connolly, Tweed watson and woodward, not as
hey are known now. but as The long experienced
trusted pubc servants. Even the suspicious
of men sitting aud acting with those men, would not
dare TO suspect them OF vie ana wcxeu purposes.
le coun sol showed usiice OF charging willful
,eoect by the argument that II the prosecution were
,sgbt every time the Mayor signed warrant without
snfch he might be imprisoned ITO years Ihe only
rof that the Board OF Audit did not meet aIoI
mat resolution the Testimony OF Garvey ano hey
80 th.I they knew Of no meetings But the pieshmp
ION of the law was that they did meet and no one cod
move tne contrary except Watson. who was dead ano
Mood ward who Vas now away. Icuhsel oonoia4, w.
altcr sIcag1ng two hours aud LA.i. by conndcnHy