Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-02-04
HASTINGS ON TRIAL
For Alleged Embezzlement of Alle-
gheny Market Rents.
no SENSATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS
Other Than Those Previously Familiar to
the Public.
MAYOR WYMAN'S CASE CONES UP TO-DAY

the AllegQenl uidihSAs 4Oi ClhOCLLAihS puo
lie funds, was begun yesterday in Crimina
Court. Judge Kennedy was on the bencl
until after the jury was chosen, when Judg'
Porter was left alone with the case. Whel
court adjourned most of the testimony wa
in, and unless the defense springs some
thing unlocked for the trial will conclude
by noon to-day. Then the case of Mayor
Wyman will be taken up.
The principal surprise Yesterday was th'
lack of interest in the Hastings trial A
rumor that Mayor Wyman was to be trieC
first brought large crowd of spectators t.
the court room in the morning, but wher
this was found to be incorrect mostot then
left, and only about the usual number o
onlookers remained during the day. The
proceedings were conducted as if both side:
were anxious for speedy conclusion, anC
little of a sensational nature was developed
outside of the facts already known to the
public
Hastings Slightly Nervous.
The defendant, Hastings, sat behind his
attorneys, Thomas NJ Marshall, Sr., and
r. B. Scandrett. He watched intently
every move made while nervously lingering
a small fold of paper. The prosecution was
represented by Allegheny City Attorney
Elphinstone. District Attorney Burlelgh,
j. A. Langfitt and ID. Z. Patterson. In Sc
lecting q jury District Attorney Burleigh
exercised the privilege of the Common
wealth by putting aside number of names.
Attorney Marshall objected to this, but
was greeted with a laugh by judge and all,
OF his change of position since the Quay
Poa libel case.
II am only following the footsteps of my
friend Ferguson" said Mr.. Marshall.
After considerable trouble the jury was
selected as follows:
VIM. sankey, brickmaker, Twenty-seventh
ward; George Harrison, boilermaker Har-
rison township; H. Z Juergins, drygoods
merchant, sixteenth ward: George Krott
merchant, Twenty-ffth ward; j. W. Harrop
pollsher, CHARTERS township; Jacob NUS
farmer Twenty second ward; Henry Ditt-
ner tailor, Nckeesport; Daniel McCurdy,
storekeeper, Penn township; John A. Force,
pattern maker Thirty-frst ward; Michael
Boyle, laborer, Thirteenth ward; Thomas
Loughry, clerk, Fourteenth ward; Charles
Pteiffer, laundry, Sixth ward, Allegheny.
As soon as the jury was sworn, the court
decided to occupy the smaller room, on the
corner of Ross and Diamond Streets and
Judge Kennedy went on with routine work
in room No. .. 1t was nearly IL O'CLOCK
when Attorney Langftt opened the case for
the Commonwea His address was very
brief not occupying more than five min
utes
What the Accusation Is.
"The defendant, he said, sis to be tried
for embezzling 81, ,314 belonging to the city
of Allegheny when he was clerk of the mar
ket 1t was mis- duty to collect the rent for
the various stalls in the market house and
turn it over to the Treasurer. The money
he is charged with embezzling was collected
during period covering two years and five
months, and claim that 25 of % monthly re-
ports were false and fraudulent, as shown by
his own books, to be supplemented by the
testimony of witnesses.
City Controller Brown was the first wit
ness sworn. Mr. Patterson conducted the
examination. Mr. Brown identified one of
Hastings receipt books, which had been
furnished by himself He then identified
the monthly reports of the ex-market clerk,
and testified that Mr.. Hastings had always
sworn to their correctness.
Thomas w. Bigger, the expert accountant
employed by the Auditing Committee to
examine the accounts of Allegheny City
officials, was next sworn. He had visited
Mr.. Hastings about the middle of July, 1891,
and asked him for all the books belonging
to him as market clerk. He received the
stubs of Mr. Hastings receipt book and
his cash blotter. The latter showed the
amount of money turned over to the city
each month. The defendant said he had no
other books. kHe did not keep a ledger
because he had never been furnished with
one.
Several Receipts Identified.
W. B. Hewitt, who has a stand in the
market, identified receipt tor S25 rent
paid for stand No. II, January 2, 1880. A.
Hancock, another tenant, identified a re-
ceipt for SIS, paid December 81, 1889 w.
L. Lamb identified check he wrote for C.
g. Hoover for stand rent for S10O, paid in
January,a1S90, for the year. George C.
Orth, the baker, identified his check tor $40
paid for years rent.
Attorney Patterson then offered the stub
book in evidence. Attorney Marshall OBJ
jected, claiming that while some of the
stubs were correct, many of them
were not Judge Porter overruled the
objection and the book was admitted The
cash blotter and 90 monthly reports
were also put In evidence, to show that the
defendant did not tnrn over to the city all |
the money he collected Mr.. Patterson said |
one of the reports tailed to show any col |
lections from garden stands, others failed to |
show collections from gas or from meat |
stands, but he explained that in the present |
case the prosecution confined itself to the |
indictment of embezzlement of rents for |
market gardening. He then offered the |
check of James A Gibson, for S57.
Controller Brown was recalled, and iden-
tined Mr.. Hastings signature as indorser on |
all The checks.
City Treasurer Macferron then took the
stand, and In answer to questions by Attor-
ney Elphlnstone testified that during the |
several months Of 1891 Mr.. Hastings had |
paid him the following amounts: January,
S648 A; February, $3.50 Is; March, S376 43;
April, S994 81; May, S626 43; June, $500 80;
July, Sl,6f2 5S; Angus, sos 80; Septem-
Der, SSl5 43; December, 81, S0S 9S. This
showed nothing for October and November,
whereas In his reports to the controller for
those months he collected the same amount
as is credited to December in the Treasurer's
books.
Corroborated BigSer's Testimony.
John McAirdy, who assisted Mr.. Bigger
in examining the city's accounts, was called.
He corroborated Mr.. Bigger's testimony.
Chief Ehlers, of the Department of Pub-
lie Works, was called, probably for the pur-
pose OF testltylng why Mr.. Hastings ser.
vices had been disposed OF, but his evidence
was not admitted.
Mr. Bigger was recalled. He testified
that he had gone over the receipts as shown
by the stuo DOCKS, and compared them with
the reports made to the City Controller and
found that they agreed. he also compared
the reports and the record of the amounts
paid to the City Treasurer and found them
TO tally.
Court adjourned at o'clock to hermit
. udge Porter to attend meeting of j Judges.
Mr. Bigger was still on the stand.
The case will be continued at e.2o +h;.
IS h.. |