The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1897-10-12

TO the same effect. Mr., Schlesinger an
nounced that he would not controvert tes-
timoGy on that point and Judge de Haven
decided to allow no more witnesses to be
called on the question. The defense also
put on a mum Der of witnesses to M peach
the character of Thomas f. Sinnott. whose
testimony was very damaging to the ex-
Collector. Z. d. McCabe, J. B. Hessler.
A. NJ. Hill, Frank Anal, K. T. McGinnis
and Myies Wallace had all known Sinnoti
in Modesto and they pronounced his repu-
tation bad. On cross-eXamlnation they
all admitted they had not heard his repu-
tatipn discussed within the last four years.
Welburn was then called to the stand.
McNab lost little time in indicating the
line of his defense. About the third ques-
lion he asked was. "W HON old you en-
ploy as chief deputy ?" Welburn re-
,ponded that it was Louis Loupe. Further
questions elected t e statement that
Loupe as we'll as other deputies. was not
qualified TO attend to his duties, and Cap
tain Youngberg was employed, al $500 per
month, to direct their labors. Young
berg was to be paid, he said, $500 a
month, which was To be mIde up by Mr..
Loupe Mr.. Whitehurst, Mr.. Aiken and
myself. T is arrangement lasted until
August, 1895. Then Aiken resigned and
his son was appointed in his D aca. l di
not have any conversation with Aiken in
all that. | do not know whether Aiken
ever did any work or not, for that was
Loupe's affair
The witness said that the vouchers were
always made out. passed upon by Loupe
and laid on his desk. He signed them,
trusting they were all right when he
made them out. Each of the employees
signed a receipt which was returned 10
him and filed. These receipts, he SAID,
had disappeared since he left the office.
He stated that number OF lmpori ant
memoranda had disappeared in the same
manner.
The ex-Collector denied that he had
ever instructed billiard to sign Aiken S
name or any other name, except in places
where a red rubber stamp would have
suffieed He said billiard might have
signed the vouchers and the receipts with
out his noticing it.
Weiburn denied positively that he had
ever received any money due Aiken In
regard to Sinnott he SAID be had fire.
quently hypothecated his salary warrants
and occasionally had let Sinnott have
money out of his own pocket. He said
Slnnott had grievance against him Tor
not putting him in a position to make
more money. He said Sinnott had re-
ceived more money than was due him,
and at the time he left the Collector S
Office still Sinnott owed the Government.
Weiburn said he had frequently paid out
for the Government more money than
they had sent him, and at the time of his
release they owed him $3.50.
His explanation of why Miss O'Brien
did not receive more than half what heT
vouchers called for was that the salaries
allowed the clerks were too high, so he
wrote to Washington for permission to
use the amount appropriated in obtain
ing as many CLERKS as he could. This
permission, he said, was granted, and 10
save trouble he continued only the
original number on the books and re-
duced their salaries eacG month TO pay
the extras. He could give no list of the
extras or account of he time they worked,
because the records had been taken from
his Office.
Attorney Schiesinger asked him if he
thought IT proper 10 sign vouchers Stain g
that certain persons were entitled to r
tain amounts when in fact they were en-
titled to only half those amounts.
He said he thought that was the best
way to do under the circumstances.
The case goes on tomorrow.