Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-02-24
WHOLE NO. lO,56O.

opinion in the case of Hynes VS. Manilinss
witness entered the fee of s. y on his cash
book, and also put it in his report Nc
Carthy tore up the report and instructed
witness to make out another, omitting the
50 ., and also to erase the sum from the
cash book. Mccarthy stated to witness
that he had an understanding with his
clerks that such fees were perquisites of the
office, and he divided them with his clei ks.
Mccarthy put this money in his pocket
and witness made the following entry on
his cash book Less S. -, bv order of ]
w. Mccarthy. The cash book with the
entry was put in evidence. Witness testi-
fled to several other instances of Mccarthy
putting in his pocket portions of fees coll
lected. IN one case. where 81 80 was coll
lected, bat 81 was put ON the books in an
other case where 81 40 was paid, and an
other where 81 90 was paid, the same was
done. In another case a fee OF $40 is due
the State, but no entry OF ii appears in the
books. The fees in Martin VS. Thompson
and Rels xS 1awrenoe. Essitss 81 error, wetc
not included III the supplemental report,
nor any other return made by Mccarthy
Counsel tor McCarthyclaimed that the
copy OF the writ of error in the case of
REFS vs.. EuwrrIrrU fGd never feft the Office,
and that the case OF Martin vs., Thompson
Durand, the fees of which We're returned
in the supplemental report.
In the matter Of the charge to the State
OF the travelling expenses to Sacramento
ON business of the Supreme Court Of j. s
Williams, Deputy Clerk, witness stated
that Williams came to Sacramento on pri-
yate business, for the purpose of orgsniz-
ing & new parlor of the Native Sons, for
which the State paid Sl3 Mccarthy also
made charge ofSl3 for 4 trip to Sacramento
in January, itemized rs follows Railroad
fare, 50; hotel bill, Sc; hack, 81 Witness
claimed that Mccarthy returned to San
Francisco on the same day; and further,
that be rode To the depot on a street car
He knew that Mccarthy did not hire
hack
Counsel for Mccarthy said that Williams
came to Sacramento with some claims for
presentation TO the State Board of Exam
liners, and that when Mccarthy came up
he missed the train and had TO stay over
night notwithstanding he had taken
car to go to the depot
Witness (Leake) said that Mccarthy had
said to him that he expected his deputies
to contribute few hundred dollars to meet
his election expenses. Later on the wit
ness received the following letter:
CLERKS OFFICE SUPREME Court.
| SAN Francisco January II. 1881
Dear Lecke. Holding the relationship with
our worthy chief of confidential friend. thor
ohghly posted in his private as well official
life, the following facts have come tony notice
That during the last campaign he was forced to
use considerable mOney-in fact, 10 the extent
seIife =, Nearly Utig-hGtT StIii re-
mains unpaid, and will come due about
the LIST of Febru lry. 1t occurred to
me that we who are reaping Il benc-
fit OF his efforts should contribute to and
bear portion of this expense Placing these
before MPSSrS MYERS and kilSbV
Cured, Not unmindful of the temporary in
convenience il will cause (as some of us will be
forced to visit our uncle) we concluded that a
contribution of $500 each, to be paid by the LIST
of February next, would not be excessive, and
be very kindly appreciated by our chief. Trust
ing that you realize the situation, and that our
views Will meet your hearty concurrence. and
awaiting an early reply, | am, with kind re-
CARDS to yourself and lady, yours, etc,
J. S. WILLIAMS,
Witness said he answered the letter, re-
plying that he could not come to the CEN
ter Williams told him he had better
reconsider his letter and pay the money, for
the order was imperative. Hence he bor-
rowed the money and forwarded it to j. ".
Mccarthy in San Francisco.
Counsel for the prosecution asked to in
| troduce in evidence letter from Governor
Stoneman 10 W,S, Leake, but the commit
tee would not receive it.
W. 5. Ieake was then cross-examined by
Mr.. Hart He stated that he might have
said that he would send Mccarthy to San
Quentin. He had always thought Nc
Carthy guilty and that he should be pun
ished, and had said so. In accordance
with instructions from Mccarthy he had
entered all fees for certified opinions at 81,
and paid the balance over to Mccarthy.
The further hearing of testimony was
postponed until Wednesday at 0 AN.