The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-04-01

Hawey and Alfred Vanderwerken, VINO were in
dicted on the charge or conspiracy to defraud the
government, was suddenly brought to a close
yesterday in the United States Circuit Court,
Brooklyn, by decision OF Judge Benedict holding
that the prosecution must fail upon the indict-
ment. The court room was crowded. as upon
Monday. Among those present were Collector
Simmons, OF Boston; Colonel herbert, formerly OF
New Orleans; Chief Clerk Hawley, OF the New
York Police Board: Assistant Solicitor of the
Treasury Robinson, General Catlin, ex-District
Attorney Morris, Thomas Il. Pearsall, United States
| commissioner Wins0w and others.
! The Court adjourned on Monday pending an
objection OF the defence to the introduction in
evidence OF the contract between Sanporn and the
Secretary of the Treasury. Yesterday Judge Bene-
dict, upon taking his seat on the bench, read the
| following
DECISION
on the question raised:-
This case rested yesterday upon an objection by
the defence to the introduction in evidence Of
what has been designated as the Sanborn con-
tract. It was urged upon the ground, among
others, that the Indictment states contract dill
ferent from that offered in evidence by the
government This objection was taken advan.
carry stage Of the trial question, appa-
renty o,c the has test question Of tns case
In determining IL remark that 1t is not to
be supposed that 1t was intended by this indlct-
menr to charge tue defendant with a conspiracy to
detraud the United States by obtaining In q lawful
way from the Treasury OF the United States sums
oT Tha anu v " virtue o. iaw
therefore, which can be gathered from the Ian
guage OF this indictment Is that Notwithstanding
the contract made with SanbOrn in respect to GER
tam taxes, II was still the duty OF the regular
revenue officers TO collect those taxes, and that
the contract gave SanbOrn no right to any portion
OF sucn OF SAID taxes should be collected by the
revenue officers without his assisting III such col
lection The charge intended to be stated there
upon is that after the execution OF the contract
A CORRUPT AGREEMENT
was made between SanDOrn and the revenue
officers named that these officers should not do
their duty IN collecting these taxes but should re-
money over to MIN in order that he might trans
nit 1t TO the secretary OF the Treasury, and there
by be enabled to CLAIM and receive under color Of
his contract money to which ne not entitled,
and the United States be thereby delrauded thereof
The contract is referred TO IN the Indictment as
one OF the means to accomplish the conspiracy
charges; but there IS no averment that the con-
tract was an illegal one, nor is the crime charged
uleut representations. The contract Is conceded
to be valid contract and to have been In
alleged Conspiracy but It is Described ii in the
indictment as q contract whereby Sanhorn
became entitled to MY per cent o Of sue i,
recovered by him (Sanborn) and which he (San-
born| should assist the officers in recovering. The
documents, Is offered Ia evidence in support Of
this argument. Being thus called on to determine
born, have examined its provisions. The result
O. my examination Is the conclusion that the con-
DOES NOT LIMIT HIS RIGHT TO A PORTION
OF such Of the taxes therein named as might be
collected 10y means OF his aid thereafter rendered,
but that upon the execution OF the contract San
born acquired right TO recover, upon the collec-
ton oil the taxes included in his contract, the
stipulated portion OF such taxes, however and by
wnOmsoever collected. The contract was claimed
by Sanborn and awarded by the Secretary upon
the ground that sanborn had already discov-
cred the Indebtedness to the United States
OF the parties named, and inat these taxes
! were being withheld. It, in express terms,
confers upon SanDorn the right to collect the
taxes due from parties deslgnakcS by name, and It
then expressly declares that whenever any money
snail be collected from the persons named-elther
| BY legal proceedings, conducted by the proper
promise OF such claim-there Shall be paid to SAN
born. out OF such money as fast as collected fifty
per cent OF the amount, which Is nowhere IN the
contract described as compensation Tor services
I to be rendered In the collecting OF the Indebted
ness which was taken TO have been discovered by
DOES NOT SUPPORT THE AvERMENT IN THE INDIcT-
MENT;
this prosecution must fall The theory upon which
this Indictment Is found depends upon q miseon-
cepton OF the scope and effect OF the contract, and
the error seems fatal to the charges i'll this indct
ment. such being my opinion upon what Is con.
consider the other grounds OF the objection.
District Attorney Tenney then arose aud said =
Is THERE POVERTY IN THE PROSECUTION
II Your Honor please, desire, before the Court is
adjourned, believing it TO be due to myself and to
my office, to make this statement. NV attention
this morning has been called to the publication of
circular in the NEW YORK HERALD pertaining to
a subscription being raised Tor the prosecution OF
this desire to say that never saw this pa
per. never knew of its existence. have never
received q dollar to aid in this prosecution, and I
have asked for dollar to and in this prosecu-
lion. Furthermore, 40 not consider it necessary
! because have always believed through the many
months / have had this case under consideration
that we mad perfect case, aud with all que deer-
ence to the decision which Your Honor has rem
dered, | stu consider that we have. and that
who are the representatives in this district
that Mr. SanDorn never assisted in the collection
Of this money, but that tue money was collected
! by Mr.. Vanderwerken and MIR. Hawey, the regular
revenue officials, and was conveyed to the Treas
ury Department. from which Mr.. Sanborn obtained
one-ha and represented TO the secretary OF the
Treasury at the same time, falsely and iraudu
enty, that II had been paid to him and that he
mad discovered and collected the same.
THE DEFENDANTS SAY THE PROSECUTION is MIS-
CONCEPTION OF LEGAL RIGHTS.
Mr.. Tracy-Now, Your Honor, we have nothing
to say reply to the speech Of the District Attor
ney after the case has been disposed Of In regard
TO- the origin Of this or what the DIS
have only to say thls:-That it seemed to us from
the beginning that the prosecution was founded in
the most marvellous inisconception OF the legal
rights OF these parties. We have never doubted
for an instant what must be the final result OF this
case the moment 1T could be brought to the test Of
a judicial decision; and, therefore, IN that conf
dence, we raise this point IN the beginning Of this
case. That Mr. sanborn has practised any decep-
ton upon the secretary OF The Treasury, before or
subsequent TO the making OF this contract Is quite
as un0unded as any other remark Of the District
Attorney. hold in my hand book. If Your Honor
please, from which 1t has been consented either
party might read, which shows by document alter
document that the secretary OF the Treasury
was informed, from time to time OF the
precise manner in which this contract was
being executed and these moneys collected and
that no deception OF any description has ever
been practised upon the Secretary Of the Treasury
by Mr.. Sanborn or by these revenue otf1cers-the
revenue officers that acted under the instructions
OF their superior officer; and, say, not only mas
this contract executed according to It's TERMS
but the contract mas been made within the letter
anu spirit the law. There is criticism in thi s
case except upon the law ITSELF
Judge Benedict-We cannot hear the defence
upon any otner charge.
Mr.. Tracy-Tnen, | suppose, upon the decision
OF Your Honor nothing remains but for Your
Honor to direct the jury TO acqut the defendants
oil the crime charged.