New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-07-16
VOLUME IX.---NO. IS
TRIAL OF AUDITOR CLINTON
SUPERIOR CRIMINAL COURT
Second Day.

/
Second Day.
The courtroom was no: 90 crowded 40 OF
the first day. and most of those present be
sides the witnesses were jurymen, who were
soon dismissed after answering the roll call
Judge Braughn appeared in court at half
past ten o'clock. The reading Of the min
utes occupied fifteen minutes. A few cases
were disposed of by continuance, and the
jury were brought in. Some witnesses being
absent Judge Braughn informed the Attor
ney General they would all probably ap
pear. The Jury was then called. Colonel
Field again placed Mr.. F. A. Sholtz on the
proclamation of the Governor of June 49,
1873, calling ON all holders of outstanding
claims on which legislative action was de-
sired to present them to the Auditor for ex'
animation. He further read the Auditors
report Of 1874. showing the appropriation Of
1871 to be $l,Ooo.0oo, and that there were
colorado pretexts fss drawing money from
the treasury outstanding, some being enti
tied to consideration. Amount presented
SAL .49O 80; approved $37 ,5o2 50; not ap
proved $398S. All of these were offered in
evidence to show that mono of the Ben
ham vouchers offered in August, 1874,
wers examined and approved by this re-
port.
Mr.. Shot. said none of them were in.
Guided.
The State :heu turned the witness over to
the defense.
Mr.. Semmes said-We will not make any
crOss.examination. and Mr.. Sholtz was dis
missed.
Colonel Field offered the record Of the
case of the Injunction against the appro-
priation bill, No. 50 Of 1874, approved
March l6 and published March IL. fled
March l., and injunction issued March lS,
1874. He referred particularly to item
forty one. "for legislative vouchers the
necessary amount is hereby appropriated
On this the Auditor was epj0ined from is-
suing any warrants ON the amounts named
in the petition. On subsequent day,
March 30, he concluded to embrace more Of
the items of the appropriation bill, particu-
larly including the second section of the
act. as in violation of the constitution, and
not included in the title: that the third Sec
ton seeks to make warrants issued under
the second section receivable for State
debts On March 90 an iDjsnction was is.
sued both to the Auditor and Treasurer.
Service Of them was presented.
Colonel Field then called for Mr.. Drury
and the books of the funding board. He
offered act No. So, and called the attention
of the jury to the title and the second sec.
ton. 10 the counsel for the defense he
said he should maintain the unconstitu-
tionality Of the second section as without
any injunction. By act No. 40 Of 1874, an
other appropriation Of $25O,OOO was made.
By act No. l Of 1870, $780, 900, and act No. 3,
$3.50, 900 more was appropriated, and in
1871 another OF 100000, and for fear
there was not enough for contingent ex-
penses, there was appropriated $l25,O0O.
These were the outstanding vouchers, so
called. Mr.. Dubuclet, the Treasurer, was
enjoined from paying any voucher or war
rant of these appropriations. By the fund
ing act it was provided for the exchange Of
valid outstanding bonds Of the State. Il
legal funding is misdemeanor.
Judge Braughn hero ordered a recess for
the accommodation Of the jury and to wait
for the books of the Auditor.
After . short recess Mr.. George Drury
was called. He stated he was clerk Of the
funding board in 1874, and in the same year
Assistant Secretary Of State; recognized
tho entries in the minutes of the funding
board at the time the $135, 900 in warrants
were funded; the board had no regular day
of meeting; il sometimes adjourned from
dsy to day: have no recollection of resolu-
tion fixing day Of meeting; is Of opinion
there was NO day fixed at that time; when
applications were made for funding the
Auditor usually had copy and the board
had the minutes; there are always applica-
tons in writing; have the impression when
the funding 10 completed the Auditor in
dorses the application, and when the bonds
are to be delivered the applicant takes his
application to the Auditor, and receives
them: don't know personally about 1t; Mr..
Sanford was Mr.. Benham's clerk, tho pres
dent Of the St. Louis Building Association;
don't know that no received the bonds
Mr.. Benham was not present at
The board at the time Of the fund
pg; the Governor was not present
It the meeting; think he was in the city,
,ut can not swear to it; didn't see him and
IAN not say that he was in the city or out
# it. [After examining the book, showing |
hat at the board meeting, August 26, the !
Auditor presided, the Governor, Lieutenant |
Governor and fiscal agent were ABSENT.
The space of nearly three pages was left
o record the process verbal, copies having |
,een published in all the papers, and the
'oard holds the originals; the applications
vere destroyed; there appears on the record
10 meeting of August q; then there was
10 meeting; don't know whether there was
nv meeting unless the record shows it;
ont remember any rule for or against the
allius of special meeting by any mem
er, nor any authority or prohibitions; 1t
vas custom for q member to call q meet
,g when there was any business.
Colonel Field read the record. August
6 the board adjourned to August q at
welve o'clock. We find no meeting on the
wenty- seventh. On the twenty eighth the
.eeting is on the application of Sanford,
,hich was adjourned to Saturday, August q.
Mr.. Drury continuing-I don't know who
lade the motion to fund; it may have been
olsnel Lowell; l don't think said in the