New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-07-03
had been made. Which was the defense to

/
q Misunderstanding and took receip
from Mr.. Hill. Got quietus in 1876
Mr.. Rice objected.
To MIR. Cotton-Have given Mr.. Clintol
warrants in settlement. Handed tn
Houston No. 2Ol9, s796 IS warranty This
my signature and wrote the body.
Mr. Rice objected to the question of Judg
Cotton, where the warrant came from.
Judge Cotton said the question was in
tended to show the receipt Of cash, and pay
lnent of warrants to the Treasurer.
Colonel Field said it had been endeavore,
to show ths warrants were illegally issued
that the warrants atterward came in pos
session of the Auditor, as shown by hi
Endorsement: that having it. used it to settl'
the accounts of Houston with the Treas
I urer.
The court said it came back to the ole
question. the illegality of issuing warrants
that never ought to be drawn till there was
money in the treasury, and made no differ
ence.
The defense made no objection.
Mr.. Houston-Did not receive tho war
rant from Mr.. Clinton; dom. know that hi
ever saw it: wrote the Endorsement anG
signed it in Mr.. Clinton's business: Mr.
Stern was present: Colonel George w. Car
! ter left the warrant in the Office; the com
! promise Endorsement was made in the Office
| didn's see Mr.. Clinton sign it; didn't notice
| the amount; didn't notice the indorsemen,
of Armstrong; the signature Of Armstrong
and mine appear to be in the same ink: the
signature is mine: did not write the Arm
strong signatures, nor know anything about
them till saw them with the investigating
committee: think paid $lf6. 81 in war
rants: Colonel Carter purchased the war
rants from Mr.. Galloway and brought them
to the Office of the Auditor: found them
there and signed them: don't know how
many there were: might have signed
100000 worth.
Cross examination BY Mr.. Rice-Have re-
ceived receipts from the Treasurer; never
examined them. suppose the settlement
was final.
Mr. Rice offered Mr.. Houston. auietus in
evidence.
Mr.. Galloway recalled-ln 1871 sold
George W. Carter principally militia war
rants.
The court said it was immater what be.
came Of the warrant. The Auditor ad-
mitted drawing it. The question was only
whether it was drawn illegally OF not.
Judge Cotton said the object was to show
that Colonel Carter neyes TUNED in the
warrant.
Judge Eoorhies said the Sta.s could not
contradict its own witness:
The court said it was immeter;al. and
Judge Cotton excepted.
Colonel Field said that by the ruling of
the court the testimony was confined to the
issue whether the Auditor illegally issued
warrants OF improperly used money.
The court said this was correct.
Colonel Field asked that if the Auditor
illegally received money and used it. it
could not be inquired into.
The court-Not in this suit.
Colonel Field-The State wishes 70
prove that the Auditor received money
from tax collectors and diverted it from
its proper course. and the cour. refused to
permit it.
Mr.. Semmes-As charged in :he petition.
Colonel Field assented and proceeded to
detail his offers of proof. Judge Hawkins,
to save time. dictated the offers of counsel
and the rulings of the court. He took tho
several charges in the petition seriatim and
repeated the rulings of the court as gwen
az the points successively cams up.
The recapitulation of the objections and
exceptions took some time.
Mr.. Semmes stated he made no objection
under the one charge that stated the money
received from tax collectors was kept and
still kept. and not. like the others, subse-
quently paid to the treasury.
Judge Hawkins said it came under the
same rule. that this reception OF money
could not be inquired into in this case.
Mr.. Semmes said that wherever there was
any imputation on the honesty of the Au-
ditor. there would be no exception. but the
State left to prove it.
Judge Hawkins said it made no differ.
ence. The primary ruling Of the court
would govern and the court itself would
reject the testimony the State would offer.
Mr.. Semmes then stated he excepted to
the ruling.
Judge Hawkins repeated the court could
not 60 into the general official conduct of
the Audito: in the settlement Of tax collec.
tons.
Colone! Field said ne had the highes. re.
,pect for the court, but was willing to rest
Tho success Of the case on the exceptions to
tho rulings. To err was human. He had
'ften been wrong, and might be now. The
State would accordingly restrict its testi-
nony to tho issue Of the Armstrong war
'ants Of $l0,7e6 IS, the Lougstreet of
300. and those of the x13S,0OO. He
'ffered the letters of the Treasurer and
Assistant Attorney General. and the letter
If the Attorney General on page twenty
i've of tbs report of the Joint committee on
he accounts of tho Auditor and Treasurer.
he proposed to prove there was no debt to J
Armstrong and no appropriation fos him.
Mr.. Semmes objected; the court overruled
t. the objection only going to the effect of !
he testimony, and Mr.. 6emmes excepted.
Colonel Field offered page lI3 of the jour-
al of the Senate. He proposed to prove
he money for the contingent expense of the |
Iouse was exhausted. and the Auditor took !
from the Senate.
Mr.. Semmes objected. Reports OF commit
ees in official reports were not evidence
gainst individuals who were not present.
Colonel Field proposed to prove the Au-
itor was present, and summoned Senator