Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-05-15


A. Yes, sir.
SOME DIRECT QUESTIONS ASKED.
Captain Wise said: Mr.. Smith asked you
the question-the hypothetical question
if S2S.S5 (Mr. Thalhimers bill) was re-
ceived on the Gath day OF February and
wasn't entered On the book aud wasn't
entered IN the drawer, ought not the book
and the drawer to have agreed If the money
wasn't deposited in the drawer and the en-
try wasn't in the hook. Would that trans
action have made disagreement
A. None at all.
O. Suppose the S442O received by Mr..
Grymes had not been put on the book but
put in his pocket, would not the cash have
come out exactly even1
A. II ought to have.
q. IL he put TA in his pocket and didn't
put it on his book would that make bis
cash shortI
A. OF course not.
Q. Would that account for its being
short?
A. OF course not
MIR. Childrey was told TO stand aside.
The Expert Accountant.
Mr.. H. h. Boudar now testified. He said
by occupation he was an accountant, and
had examined the books in the Treasurer's
and Auditors offices.
Major Stringfellow objected TO the entire
testimony of Mr.. Boudar, while the Com
monwealth's Attorney insisted the evil
dence was allowable. He said he would
prove certain facts by the cash-settlement
book of Grymes, which went back as far
as August 1. 1890. those prior to that date
having disappeared. He would take books
and settlements signed by Grymes to
prove his point.
The Judge asked Mr.. Smith how could
he know this
HOW 1T WOULD DE SHOWN.
The Commonv ,lth's Attorney replied
that if the par and books were in
Grymes's writing they must be his. If the
desk-books added up one amount and
Grymes's cash-settlement book showed
smaller ones there was something wrong
Major Stringfellow, replyinglto this, said
that in eleven days out of thirteen the
"blotter" was made out by person other
than Grymes. 1t was nothing but mere
copy.
Grymes's business so merge oil the ac-
counts into one, write up the cash-settle-
ment and nk-deposit books.
The judge oyerruled Major Stringfel-
lows objection and the defence reserved
the point.
Mr.. Boudar's examination was resumed
by Mr.. Smith.
Q. Mr.. Boudar, do You know Mr..
Grymess handwriting and fgures2
A. Figures are hard TO tell, but with his
handwriting am pretty familiar.
q. Are the daily reports signed by MIR.
Grymes?
4. have seen over 100 and all of them
were signed by him.
NUMEROUS DISCREPANCIES.
AZ ka1 hot ha
show that 800, $40 $50. and $50 per day
had been lost by the city. The cash set
Elements appeared TO be perfectly correct
when compared with the daily reports to
the Auditor, both of which were made out
by Mr.. Grymes.
Mr.. Smith: Start at January 16, 1891, Mr..
Boudar, and explain how much discrepancy
there is between the desk-books and the
cash-settlement books?
A. On that day Mr. Greenhow's book
showed S301. IS. Mr. Grymes's S4S2.26; to-
tai, S784.l1. The cash-settlement book
prepared by Grymes called for only
S70l.11, a discrepancy of $50. Mr. Green
how specified the denomination Of his
money when he settled up. Mr.. Grymess
account Otated cash, checks. notes, and
tickets TO be so much. The deposit the next
day was $50 less than il should have been,
but IL corresponded exactly with the cash.
settlement book.
THE cIrY's LOSS.
Mr.. Smith: The desk-books added up
$7s4. IL. the bank book showed $50 less-a
discrepancy. Whose loss was it2
A. The city of Richmond.
Mr.. Smith. Mr.. Boudar, look at Febru-
airy q, 1891, what does it show?
Grymes's book, 81, S1,159.15-total, 81 ,56l.2s.
The cash-settement book only showed
81. .527.77. There was in the statement
made by Mr.. Grymes q total omission OF
S3. IA for water, and in the Second district
eas of S27. .67-total, $33.5l, which was Q
clear loss TO the city. The deposit-book
showed that Sl,527.T was deposited the
Mr.. Smith: Mr.. Boudar, how about
February 6, 1891?
Mr.. Boudar: Mr.. Greenhow's book called
for S790.45; Mr.. Grymess for Sl,lsS.sl-
total, 81. .f9.26.
The cash-settlement book only showed
S1,969.36.
ONE DAYS SHORTAGE.
Mr. Smith How much shortage was
that?
Mr.. Boudar: Ten dollars and ten cents
Mr.. Smith: make it $3.50.
Mr.. Bouder: So IL IL.
Mr.. Spotswood: How did you come tc
make it S10.l0l
Mr.. Smith: Mr Boudar, you were adding
the figures in your head.
bIr. Boudar; Yes.
Mr.. Smith: And Grymes was adding or
paper. How about February z5th?
A. Mr.. Greenhow's desk-book called fol
S7l.s3; Mr. Grymes's S1,s9l. l.73-total
g, ,063. SO. The cash-settlement book onl,
showed S2.0j4.36. The deposit agreed with
the eash-book. II had TO agree or the re
port to the Auditor would have shown th'
discrepancy. The Auditor knows at th,
end of each day what balance Is in banl
and the amount of the days receipts
which are kept in the Treasurer's safe.
Mr.. Smith: How much was this discre
pancy2
Mr.. Boudar Nine dollars.
| Mr.. Smith: Whose loss was IL?
Mr.. Boudar: The city OF Richmond.
Mr.. Smith: Look at March 2. 1891. Hov
was the money that day?
Mr.. Boudar: Mr.. Greenhow's desk-book
s698.i6: Mr.. Grymes's, S2.767.72- total
| Ss.466.ls. The cash-settlement book onl
showed S3.455.s3, o discrepancy of $i0.S5.
Mr. Smith: Who lost that 7
Mr.. Boudar: The city of Richmond. Tn
omission was from the gas receipts OF tn
| First district by Dir. Grymes. The deposi
4
less than the amount in the desk book,
The deposit of the Sd was in Grymes'
| writing.
| RIGHT TWICE.
How about January 81. 1891 (? queried Mr
| Smith.
The books were all right that day, n
sponded Mr.. Boudar.
December "a. 1850? next asked Nj
Smith.
That day. answered Mr.. Boudar. th
desk books called for $l.iis.sS; the Gas
settlement showed only $1.i07.si; the dii
crepaney was $ll.H.
| Mr.. Smith Who lost thstf
Mr.. Boudar: The city OF Richmond. IN
omission was in the Third district e.
$l.57. in the FRS. $40.
Mr.. smith Give the statement OF Oct<
be7 II, 1880?
Mr.. Boulder, There was only one desi
book settled that day-Mr. Grymes'& IN
1 amount ana n Wua correct