Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-01-21

produced from Geo. A. Triple for $57.5
and it was pointed ont that no charge was
made by accountant for the same and
that numerous witnesses were sworn to
having received and accounted for goods
in varying sums Of which no charge has
been made by the accountant.
1t is rumored that the grand jury voted
12 to 10 to ignore the bills.
The following persons compose the
grand jury this week.
Washington Bunting, farmer, Colcrain.
Jacob Bachman, gentleman, Strasburs
borough, foreman.
Carpenter Bender, cabiEctmakcr Earl.
Levi II. Bear, gentleman, Earl.
John DOrdey, shoemaker. iiapho.
Samuel EbersOle, farmer, COHoy.
Frederick Herniser, agent, Ninth ward,
city.
ID. b. Harnisl,, farmer, East CocalicO.
John Harsh, engineer, Columbia.
Israel II. johns, farmer, Upper LeacOck.
David NJ. Mayer, farmer Mannheim twp.
John L. Nccl, carpenter, Martic.
ID. S. Sunny, coachmakcr, Mani.cinl
twp.
Moses Spansier, miller East Earl.
Samuel Snyder, farmer, Paradise.
Frank NJ. Trout, farmer. Bart.
John Wade, blacksmith, Leacock.
Geo, G. Worst, farmer, Salisbury.
ID. Brainerd Williamson, editor FIRST
ward, city,
John Wolf, coac:lmaker, Rapho.
5. E. Wisner, merchant, Marietta
Amos B. Zell, N. d., Little Britain.
The Prison Book Keeping.
At the prison the clerk keeps account,
for the keeper. from day to day, of all
moneys received for goods s"id, etc. These
items are entered in the cash book. lie
also keeps account OF all bills paid and
files his voucher for them ut tic end OF
the mo, tn, the balance being settled
monthly by voucher Of credit or charge
between the clerk Cor keeper nominally)
and the treasurer OF the board of inspec-
tors.
In the above cases the present manage
ment and prosecution held that III The cases
of Diller, Gasscr. Miles, Bitncr and Gem
perling they have produced testimony out.
side of the books to show that the amounts
stated in the keepers vouchers. and for
which credit was given iii the clerks :ic-
count, were in excess 81! the amounts sc
tually paid.
In the ii class, AS stated, the clerks own
books show the variance.
In the H., ~, Y. and VI. classes, the
casl, book for December. 1S.? ic April l.,
1880, which is at hand fails To show any
record of the missing receipts. Tine Off
cials who received the goods and account
ed for the same testify {" that effect the
weaver sv ears ID the carpets woven ana Il
number Of the customers, VII" welc pro
duced, swore To having g,i them the cash
book makes 10 mention Of tlirm nor OF
the Nimlow money for which his receipt
is produced. In the ". class, nlaniicStly,
if credit is asked for goods taken from the
manufacturing department, they should
appear as charged 10 the clerk, which they
do not.
The charges of d.faicaticT, avcTn Sin ng
the carpets, foot up about IS follows:
Excess of credits. ...........S! S!ii :!
Goods sold to officials mol accounted
for. :......... - W Uo
Carpets not accounted for, ahon;........ l25 90
Nini;ow .................. 81 20
PrlSon account .-.....-.......'...'' . VI
Total (3DOut) 10
MI. Triple denies the charges in toto
says he is not indebted to the prison, and
is guilty Of no fraud or irrcguiarity if
any changes have been made in the books
they have been made since he lett that
the cash book disappeared under his sue.
cessor's administration and was there
when he CTripplc) left tina. al moneys
received by him were entered in the cash
book; that all expenditures were as tie
vouchers he filed indicates and none were
raised, and finally that the prosecution is
a persecution and the grand jury so dis
covered.
The Charges.
OF the complaints on which, the ignored
indictments were founded the first charged
Charles D. Triple with destroying or mu-
tilating the cash book of the prison 70: the
three years during which he was clerk,
from Nov. 30, 1876, TO Nov. 80, 1879. The
complaint is drawn under i special act of
assembly providing punishment fer such
offences. The second complaint charged
Charles d. Triple and George A. Triple.
Jointly, with felonious!y having stolen and
appropriated to their own use the sam OF
$50 of the county money, which came
into their hands between Aug, 1879. and
Feb. 3, 1880. The third complaint
charged the same defendants, jointly, with
having feloniously embezzled and stolen
the sum of 1925 between Feb. 5, 1880, and
April 1, 1880.