Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-03-19
MR.. CALDWELL's CASE.
The Testimssy OF the Former Cissk or the
Cont Of Appeals at wytheviiIe Cenesrssas
His salary.


The Testimssy or ths Former CLERK er the
Cont Of Appeals at wythe,iIIe Cenesrssax
His salary.
Yesterday full meeting Of the COM
mittee appointed TO investigate the af-
fairs in the Auditors Office was held.
The committee wanted to get at the
facts in the case Of Joseph W. Cald-
well, late clerk Of the Supreme Court
at Wytheville. He was entitled to
draw a salary Of $500 per annum for
nine years and did not do it. lie left
it in the Treasury TO Offset what he
owed the State. When sworn he was
asked:
O.. During what period were you
clerk of the Court Of Appeals at wyths-
vile?
A. Ny recollection is that was ap-
pointed the Goth Of June, 1870, and |
was in office until the LIST Of January,
1888.
Y. 1t appears from warrant No. 649,
drawn by the Acting Auditor upon the
Treasurer, and the Treasurer's check
endorsed thereon on the Merchants Ma
tional Bank Of Richmond, dated 0cto-
Der 2S. 1882, that s3,333.33 was drawn
on account Of your salary from Novem-
Der /, 1871, to July l, 1878, as such
clerk. Did you ever collect or author
ize the drawing Of such warrant for
the collection Of your salary
A.. was never aware that any war
rant had been drawn at all on my sal
ary. | never authorized anybody to
draw it, unless that authority was con-
ferred by an order referred to in let
ter of mine dated November IA, 1873,
which refers to an order forwarded in
letter of Mr.. Smith to me in regard
to my salary. What the contents Of
that letter TO me were do not now re-
collect, but my impression is that the
order as sent tom by Mr.. Smith was al
tered by me before signing it, with the
intention of guarding against its being
drawn without being applied to my
dues to the Commonwealth. That is
all that ! recollect about it. GER
tainly never gave any other authority
than that given in that paper.
q. Please examine warrant No.
7,7S9, dated September %. 1883. for
81 400, drawn by the Acting Auditor
on account of your salary as clerk of
the Court of Appeals from the lst
of July, 1873, to the lst Of January,
1888, on which is endorsed the check
Of the Treasurer for the amount on the
Merchants National Bank of Richmond,
which seems to have been paid by that
bank and state whether you ever au-
thorized the drawing Of that warrant
or col ected the money upon the check
all you know about it?
A. / never saw this warrant until
this morning when it was shown to me.
I knew nothing whatever of it's having
been drawn, and ] never got any part
Of its contents.
q. In your deposition heretofore
given to the committee by interrogato-
ries you have claimed credit by the
whole amount Of your salary. If it had
heen drawn by yonr authority you
would not nave been entitled to such
credit. State whether it was ever so
drawn or could haze been drawn 9TH
erwise than to have been placed to the
credit Of the amount you owed the State !?
A. 1t could not, to the best Of my
recollection, and | was not aware of
any attempt to draw it until saw it in
the newspapers some days ago.
BY Mr.. Barton Q. Was there any
other occasion for you to have your
salary drawn than for the purpose of
having it applied to your dues?
/ A. None whatever.
John Morton, sworn and examined.
BY Mr.. Moon: Q. | here exhibit to
you two warrants drawn by r. A.
| Noel, Acting Auditor of Public Ac-
counts, in favor of Joseph w. Cald-
well--one dated October %, 1882, for
| 1888. 80, the other drawn September
2S, 1883, for 81, ,400-upon which are
endorsed checks for the receipt of the
amounts of said warrants upon the
Merchants National Bank, payable to
bearer, signed by d. K. Reveley, Trea-
surer of the Commonwealth Of Vir-
ginia. Please state if you, as assistant
cashier of said bank, know to whom
the said checks were paid by said bank,
or whether they were paid or not!
A. This check for l,400, dated
September 2S, 1888. bears the stamp
of the Merchants National Bank as
having been paid the 29th of September,
1888. That is the only evidence | can
give on that. could not say how that
was paid. ] would have to examine
the books. The check for s3,333.33,
dated October %, 1882, was paid at
the Merchants National Bank. The
date of the 2sth Of October is an error.
The stamp Of the bank on the check is
dated the 9th October, and looking
for the check to-day. ! found the check
was paid on that day. 1t is what we
call - spindle check evidence that
it passed over the counter, which means
that it passed in through the counter
and not through exchange. In exam
ing the check-books to find whether a
check had been given for it, | find no
check for that amount, but under that
date find check for $4,000, drawn
in favor of William r. Smith on the
Third National Bank, New York, on
which he paid 81 exchange. He bought
the check, in other words. for 81, which
was not customary for the Common
wealth to do. the presumption being
that the difference between the $4,000
and the check for s3,333.33 was paid
in currency.
Q. To whom was this check for
s3.333.33 paid?
A. ! could not say, because cannot
recollect that, but presume Dir. Smith
got it, as the $4,000 check was made
| payable to his order.
Q. In whose handwriting are these
warrants filled in?
A. j take it to be Mr.. Smiths writing.
q. Do you know his handwriting?
A. | think do.
q. Have you seen him writer
A. lie has been in the habit Of at
tending to these things in the Office, and