New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-06-29
THE REPORT.

lected one of ms chief assistants MI w hecer H.
Peckham who has given able and faithful service
to the people.
The people hoped to prove upon the trial of these
actions that of the than $4,000, 1000 of claims
audited by this Board in 1870, at least 60 per cent
and certain amount of interest was false, and for
which the County of New-York had received moth
ing; that the members of this Board of Audit knew
of the faisity of these claims when they audited
them; that of this SO Der cent, William NJ Tweed
received % Richard sB. Connolly 20. Peter B..
Sweeny, OF his representatives, TO- and that
10 per cent and the certain amount Of
interest was divided among several other
persons. The remaining 80 per cent of the audited
bills were received and kept by the in whose
names the bills were and was believed to be in the
main for supplies actually furnished to and work
actually done for the County of New-York, although
probably at extortOnate prices.
THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST sWEENY
There are three untried indictments against Peter
b. Sweeny Upon the 3Oth of November. 1876.
received from Mir. Wheeler II. Peckham letter
OF which the following is copy
LAW oFtlcE or , dnL Ia. & J PfG 1546}
PEOPLE ACT swEIEY
Hon CHAs 6 FAIRCHID. AHorHey- GeneTGi;
prAR SIR: Some time since. at the request OF nj
c'conor s,nt p letter to Nj McKcon, attorney for
sweeuy. offering liz S@ecny W"uld appear on t'S
That eject Within lew days past M McN'"h "cVt "t
Summation winch he desires signed by your
self aud tie District Attorney here: and ny
AMI roysclf commences itself yOar consideration please
sign the stipulation and return the same ~ me- ny
viii see that ar McKeon has reason when he urecs the
immediate execution OF the cclheae or sIYu'''S, E"
t-,, i, ~ ''' WnsELTG H. PECKHAm.
Ibe idea Of having defendant here is that We have
De viii be called uuOu 10 cApdiu anu
not HIS failure waca present. to do So would be con
With said letter was incloscd the stipulation re-
ferIed to therein. ! at first demulred 70 Aeiihe
said stipulation, and delayed dong so Tor lev
DAYS but after consultation with tire counsel en-
gagged by the People u conduct the action against
Sweeny, | signed the stipulation.
The stipulation Is given. II IL 70 the elect tnat
Sweenv would attend the trial OF the action against
him ne shOuld not be arrested or any sul ciVii or
criminal, for period OF 80 days subsequent thele.o'
Under this stipulation SWeeiT returned 10 NY
York last Spring. Tie following report from MT.
peckham and Nh. Nash relates the further proceed
iDgs i'm the Sweeny case, aud the reasons winch lea
To- fhe final action thereon ] considered that getting
the 800. 900 in this action was under the Clfcun-
stances fortunate, and the acceptance OF III mas ny
approval.
Hon. CHARLES S. FuRCmLD Atcrney General
SIR: We have made an arraug cement ia The Of the
People against Peter r. sweeny which renders nnneces
sarv n lrial of that case.
s il was eonclndcd in your absence it proper
that should report 10 y0u our action, Trough rom
the consultations we bad previously held Will YOU We
hal every 10 suppose II would meet Win your
approval III,
act without awaiting JOIr retufn. 49,,
The action founded Oh Tue frauds perpetrtted
throu~h HE action 81 Board ~ Audit composed 81
Hall Connolly, and Tweed, and also As regards SIX ilcpr
through the action ~ weed 1d Nonnou SeI i an
giving tue Controller C"nrcly power Whe!e SUI. idu
been commenced against the city to ADJUST ana pay the
claim.
In both cases tie frauds pcpotraicd by requiring
ors who had claims present bills Tor much larger
suns aud to allow the excess 10 bc retained by the public
officers. In sOme cases the Claimants pi5 were aleIcu
ly the officers and TIE excess retained
The case against swCeay differed from that against
a G, o. he Basrd Of Audit or an officer charged with
any duty in respect TO The claims iraHa4leny lalG
audited aud paid was. therefore, not in Itself evidence
Txcopt Tic evidence OF Ingerso stated in the al
d hcre Of0re made by MIN, there no testimony OF
direct acts OF conversations Of sweeny tending To snow
hA party to the conspiracy Tor Tie "u' ana Pay iheNI
or evidence would nave. IN other had very
conclusively established that but 50 per ce;t oi these
claus retained by toe claimants that p per cent
paid 10 Tweed, and that 40 pefteht an" te n.ltst
olce disbursement among the other parties sharing
tie spJus
We were able 20 show with very high degree Of prob
ability that about eluatcr OF THIS 40 l~F cent g.,
about per cent 81 te whole claims a"dii'I-Weie re-
ceyed by James A. swceny the b0tber OF Tie defend
ant James ~ WAS then Deputy Cuam0eria!n, Lis
br. theriulaw. NJ. BRADLEY. beiue Chainb,rain
We could show TINS 10y tne testimony Of iueof-Oi hrd
Woodward by the several bank accounts oi j. m"s
n which disclosed tc0e lu re dei 's's ia Ollie ana a
By All examination Ot The bans accounts ana Of the
property purchased and money used py Prt'f T. SWeeh!'
AID comparison o. tine same VITA payments oil Jane
NJ we were able "a trace large sums from james ". 10
Peer D. amounting during tine period Of tic Board Oi
Audit 10 go 100. Ia ue,c payments there WIS 40
rc-li.ray elmer 10 time or propoIiioh Ihcy mai
cateG au agency % james IT. Tor Pcicl Is. .
In addition t. ais evidence lad general proof OF
the political and personal intimacy Of Peter b, WIN
Tweed rG Connolly, ana OF nis interest Ia TIE legislation
OF 1870.
These proofs we're deemed ample 10 warrant the com
Te .es te testimony, and the situation Nc;
conclusive. bat cel family SucH - 10 GAIL i0l AL cA
PLANTATION as the defendant ,..
The defendant. however, was ont ot the jurisdiction
The claim That hc would nc able 70 explain "i r'se,
bur that he iac,i'aly VANISHED u-td'' ui''te 20
give tbo large bad wnich would DC demaoec snSii1 ne
feturu would be formidable a. ,euse or a tf1i
II was tieI concluded To ohtr To lut tho pi Al -ucu
amount a. the defendant could ave A. be wouG return
To- the trial such az 0rci Vas maze Dhi Il attod On
IL vac then determined 20 Oner 20 aO" nm 70 return
ana attend the trial without bail 49,. No.. , -
That offer was made and acctptcd. ana on the 1871 HF
Of pee mher 1876, tnC stipulation was given hnlci
which he returned, allowing nun 10 remain uuiiNa dhD
To- 50 days af,cI ..le uIdi without arrest,
when the action was commenced, az me ltopeiiy OF
s. eeuv ila could Doe found was attached. lts present
Va ue over and above ncuubiancce, was estndtcc AZ
S252JOO. less his wie's nent OF qo"I Mueh ts MOI
VI liable part an undivided interest ana SUBJECT !"
Ia5 we recovered Judgment. coud have enforced
II only oui 81 ta prop y. Our stipulation W0uld hSNs
rrclir1 ms 10 allow Toe defendant 10 depart, and with
etf ibe stipulation he never would have come
As L. ne property, 10 was our uts judgment tnht
,se Of thr samc Oh execution would DC very unlikely 10
realize over say 100000.
Moreover Lad VIC failed 10 connect sweeny Win the
CONSPIRACY and recovered from him only the amount
ncIufily iccsiycd iy him. ~ Is exceedingly doubtn.
Whether 0c could have collected suci comparative!
small amount without thereby releasing an ths Other
CO. sIiratOrs, including tue one "s"n'' WYNN J"Neo'
ME tia tie collection Of sny one Of several Juds-
m, ms for one wrong discharge all, rs iamiil"f
NJ - n frrda.,t here aad Obliged either 10 make no
~, n, I an To the stand md subject himself
" i XHul a-On, we ifl' iini "e h"u s"l- o4e'
tu " cOui4 shul - ~ t"e poSsiDh'y Oh " die