New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-07-04
VOLUME 1X.---NO.
SUPERIOR DISTRICT COURT.
Auditor Clinton on Trial.

brief oue. although the proportion OF time
consumed IN argument was about :he
came.
Frank II. Wilson was first sworn, AID
testified he was clerk Of John w. Madden
in ls. 3. and attended to the furnishing of
stationery 20 the Legislature on the sequis:.
ton, of Sergeant-at.Arms: e. &. Haley
furnished i: at the opening OF the year:
furnished stationery, byooms. brushes.
desks. etc: never knew j. w. Armstrong;
would have known if any other house than
Haleys had furnished stationery; never
heard Of Armstrong; never saw the voucher
before. but recognizes the signatures CT
Matthews and Lowell.
On cross examination he said clerk. MT.
George. kept the accounts OF the Commit
tee On Contingent Expenses, and had seen
the book in their room; did not know if the
Armstrong voucher was in 1t: neye. ox-
amined the book.
Mr. Lipshutz re called-We,ked twelve
days liz the Auditors office examining his
books: copied every voucher OF the regular
and special sessions Of 1873 and the regular
A|"N07-.
identified copy from his bookl Thirty
oec cent to the mileage and per diem OF the
members and employees was added by the
committee. and the Auditor disputed the
payment.
The Attorney General offered four copies
of the book, and Mr.. Semmes objected TO
;hem. After much discussion, the Attorney
Genera. wishing to show the Armstrong
voucher was not in the list. the lists were
excluded and Colonel Field excepted Mr..
Semmes learning afterwards that the lists
were copies Of papers found in the Auditors
office, withdrew his objections aud the lists
wen: liz.
Mr. L;pshuts continuing, said there was
40 Armstrong voucher among them: none
20 high as that in number l3O0l nor so large
IN amount. isl0.7s6 75); the largest was to
w. A. Weed. over $4,000: Mr.. Madden had
several of $4,000. The amounts issued ac-
cording TO the balance sheet Of the investi-
eating committee for the extra session of
1872. was s59.lSi Is; for the regular Of
1873, $l47. .O6i 30. MIR. Matthews gave a
balance sheet Of the expenses Of the CON-
:nittes. He first evaded it, then refused,
but 20 prevent the matter coming before
the House. supplied it. Filled in evidenced
Know the Armstrong warrant was drawn
on ths thirty per cent from the balance
sheets. The Endorsement Of Armstrong is
in a disguised handwriting. but looks like
Colonel Lowelrs.
TO Mr.. Semmes-Made the examination
January and February of 1874.
A.. L,iria. sworn--Am cashier Of tho First
National Bank. Examining the voucher, he
said. the body CT it did not appear like tie
writing in Mr.. Matthews signature; didn't
wee any two letters alike: no comparison or
similarity between them: there is no simi.
iarity in tho Endorsement of Armstrong to
the signatures of either Matthe VS. or Lowell;
:he three styles of handwriting of the in.
dorsements on the warrants are all different,
and none Of them are the same as the one on
the voucher; of the Pinckney Smith vouchers
he said the bank held $33. 407 80 pledged
by Smith and man named Carr; Mr..
Bsnham said he was going to fund some Of
his own and could fund them. and Mr..
Oglesby said to give them to him; did SO
in March: there was no more conversation;
next saw Benham in August, 1874: he had
the warrants; they were made out wrong;
TO the name of Mr.. Oglesby instead of the
bank. and had to indorse them, Mr.. Oglesby
being away; never sent near the board nor
the Auditor: never asked Mr.. Benham about |
them. as he was away; made memo.
|randum from the pledge book. lFiledl.
No questions by the defense, except to !
Explain the figures of the memorandum.
Peter Mooney swOrn-Am warrant clerk |
>f the Auditor; filled out the Armstrong |
karrants: was not given the voucher, but !
osegfelder or Scholtz received it; delivered |
ne warrants TO the person who indorsed |
the name Armstrong; don't remember ever |
Being him before or since; can't describe !
Jim; must have been the party who made
Che indorseIhent; don't know who intro.
uced him or who came with him; don't
kuow how he looks; know whether it was
man or woman; if q woman, there would
bave been wOman's name indorsed; the
besk where receipts are signed is ten or four
eeen feet from the warrant desk; looked up
krmstrong's name in the directory when
the talk commenced about him; had
30 curiosity about him; heard of him
First in February; don't remember, be-
cause deliver SO many warrants in year;
did not make out the $l3s, 900 warrants; saw
hem after they were made out, March II
,r 49, don't know whether Mr.. Clinton had
zone away at that time or not; gave them
% him to sign when he came back; the Au-
litor or had possession of them till delivery;
rave them to Benham in August or Septem-
yer; the receipt is dated March II because
made out then to have it ready; was made
mt by sample made by Mr. Sholtz accord
ng to memorandum ON the voucher; some.
lines receipts are signed in advance and
eft by the parties; don't know in whose
resence the receipts were signed.
Judge Hawkins asked where this was ex. ,
ected to lead to. II
Colonel Field said he wished to show that {
he chief clerk having first taken it upon
imself to pass and fill up the warrants,
nat the Auditor, with q full knowledge / I
nat he was not authorized to issue the war 6
ants, had signed and issued them, and
,at the present witness differed entirely I
ith the chief clerk. The Auditor was e
,sponsi0le for the acts of his clerks.
Judge Hawkins ruled that it was impos-
bic to hold the Auditor for such things
hen the issue was merely question of !.
H4 thA venvN 1