St. Paul daily globe., 1893-04-22
BURNS ON The STAND.
The County Auditor Testifies
In His Own Behalf on
Alleged Frauds.
Not an Expert Himself, He
Relied on. the Judgment
of the Expert Printer.
Bills Made Out With the Idea
That They Would Be
Analysed.
Prac teal Hen Differ Materi-
ally on Some Points--Re-
fusal to Dismiss.

ue1enSe last evening, WIeH Couls az
iOurned over, as is the custom, until
Monday morning, when the trial OF the
county auditor for the alleged presenta-
tiun of false claim TO the county for
printing the court calendar will be re-
sumed. At the opening of court Burns
will be on the witness stand 10 further
explain his method of doing the county
printing. The regular term of court is
not held Saturday, because that Is the
day taken by all the judges to hold spe-
cial term. and for this reason the jury
was excused. after a caution by Judge
Egan, until Monday morning.
Interest in the trial yesterday was as
manifest as on the preceding days.
During the forenoon the state rested,
and then Mr.. Erwin. for the defense,
moved to dismiss, on the theory that the
state had not made out case sufficient
to Justify the defense in proceeding
further with testimony. Mr.. Erwin
spoke at length in arguing the motion
to dismiss. and cOniended that there had
not been sufficient proof as to the pres
entation of the bill by Burns, and con-
printer was the man who presented the
bill to the board of commissioners.
Burns had verified the fact that he had
furnished the calendar with its printing
and materials, and the work of meaSur-
ing and compiling was done by the eX-
pert printer, who also fixed the value of
the compensation to be given Burns.
Shifting the Blame.
Mir. Erwin also contended that the
testimony of the state witnesses shows
that more pages of printed matter, more
ruled paper and a greater weight of
paper had been supplied than the in
dictment set out as being the shortage.
In fact, nearly all discrepancies be
tween the bill allowed and the aliega-
tiOns of the indictment had been sup
piled by the witnesses for the state. 1t
was argued that any slight difference
that might exist could in any event be
considered as nothing more than mis-
take or accideut.
County Attorney Butler replied to
the motion to dismiss with an able pres
entatiOn of the case, coupled with all
explanation Of the law relative to the
intent with which the bill was present
ed. He contended that there still re-
mained the question as TO the shortage
on one or two points; yet In others the
proof was exactly as laid in the lndict-
ment, and that this would be sufficient
to warrant conviction for the preSenta
tiOn of false bill.
Judge Egan in refusing to grant the
motion to dismiss stated that there may
be good deal in the point made by the
defense. but, inaSmuch as the slndlct-
ment charges the presentation of false
bill, he would let the case, go to the
Jury. He TeminCed the counsel for the
defense that he had stated previously
that mere technical error was sui
fcIent 10 take the case to tie jury, as 1t
was for them to determine from all the
facts the truth or falsity of the allega-
tiOnS in the Indictment. In his view
there still remains variance between
the bill presented and the proof as TO
The ruled She6tS and the pounds or
paper, as well as the printed pages, and
although under q liberal construction
the variance amounts 10 no more thau
50. yet the jury should be allowed to
pass upon the matter.
The Defense Opens.
Henry Johns then proceeded to open
the case to the jury for the defense, and
to outline that side Of the case. He took
occasion to characterize the case as one
of persecution. and to deliver roast
upon Brown. Treacy IL Co. He declared
that jealousy was at the back of the
prosecution This persecution had
begun after Burns was elected to the
office of county auditor, and after ru-
mors had been bruted abroad the in
VeStigatiOn was brought about by Burns
himself, who demanded an inquiry into
his business as county printer.
Mr.. Johns grew eloquent at times and
characterized the defendant as being
innocent of any wrong and as acting
with an honesty of purpose in standing
between the grasping and the deserving
poor. lie said that Mr.. Burns is not an
expert and did not know how to figure
his bills. He had gOttensuch infOrma-
ton as he could and had made out the
bills for the court calendars in exactly
the same way that had been pursued by
the Dispatch, the Pioneer Press and by
Brown, Treacy q Co. when they fur
nished the court calendarS--tne same
way that David Ramaley had given in
structions to make out the bills for the
calendar. He said that il would not be
| contended that the bills were absolutely
| correct, but that Mr.. Burns relied on
Martin Dries, as county expert printer,
! to figure out the amount he was en-
| titled to receive for the calendars. Mr..
| Burns did not claim to be an expert, and,
| as matter of fact, could not make out
| bill for the complicated work done. 1t
was asserted that the county has re-
! served over 81 600 of the money due Mr..
Burns to indemnify it from any over
charges III addition to the fact that 1t
| has good bond to indemnify it against
| loss.
The county attorney objected to the
reference to the county retaining money,
and also to the tact that the county bad
not entered civil suit against Burns to
reimburse it for shortages. Judge Egan
sustained these objections.
Mr.. Johns said that the defense would
offer to show that the court calendars
are furnished cheaper now than they
were when the county had four fewer
| Judges. Mr. Butler objected, and the
court stated decidedly, "You can't
| prove that. 1t is not admissible"
Dries on the stand.
At the conclusion of his address Mr..
| Johns called Martin Dries to the stand
| he has been a resident Of the city for
| thirty-eight years. and has been the
county expert printer since 1889, at
which time the Dispatch was printing
the court calendar. lie said he had
allowed the Burns bills on the same
basis as was allowed to the Dispatch.
Objection being made, the court de-
cded that no comparisons would be
allowed, but permitted Mr.. Dries to
testify that he had increased the first
bill presented by Burns to the
amount of $50. This was done Oh a
computation Of the number of pages III
the calendar. Mr.. Dries said there was
no cOlluSiOn between him and Burns,
but he had acted cOnscienstiously and
honestly, and according TO the same
course pursued by him before Burns
got the contract. An attempt was made
to prove that the bills were sent to
Dries before being presented to the