New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-10-03
COURT CLERKS KEEP FEES.
APPELLATE DIVISION HEARS A MOTION
FOR DU MAHAUTS REMOVAL.
SHORTAGE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF OTHERS
WHICH HAD JUSTICE woRCEsTERs
ENDORSEMENT

ENDORSEMENT.
The Appellate Division Of the Supreme Court re-
surned a.. sessions yesterday after the summer
vacation The ordinary work Of the Octoner 'ein
Will not be taken up until to-day the usual u"S
OF the week for all terms to begin
A motion made before Justices bar'e'' -
,erson O'Brien and Mclaughlin for the removal
~ Adolph n Du Mahaut clerk OF the HIth DlstTlct
/. Nfuniclpal Court Of Manhattan. who Is charged
with falling 10 turn $lO9 In court ices
ant Corporation Counsel James Flynn app'"'e" '0'
| the Corporation Counsel and julius NJ Mayer app
peared for Du Mahaut This proceeding J. '' ~
usual one and IS the first ever to be brought De-
tore the APPELLATE Division OF the Supreme Court.
1t Is brought under Section 1883 Of the char''''
William j Bell clerk IA the once oil the I'm
missioner OF Accounts. said that where the '"''S
Of the municipal justices required mat ce''"''
proceeding should be put down as a trial II was
put down "a an inquest and only {" cents turned
over 70 the CITY Chamberlain. wheR from y TO -
ought 10 have been turned over
Mr. MAYER contcnded that his cfrnt was not
guilty OF an nfracton Of the rules except IN INC
case Of Sc go which was mistake. He asked
Mr. Bel:
Have Won examined the accounts Of the other
clerks"
IAN Of them" replied the witness
You have found deficiencies in the accounts OF
others. have you not?'
Mr. Bell stated that he had found dehclencies IN
the accounts Of the other clerks
Have there been any proceedings Instituted
against the other clerks asked Mr.. Mayer
Not so far as ] know" replied the witness
Then Presiding Justice Van Brunt asked. Has
the attention Of the Corporation 'oun-'l been
called 10 any ethcr casesy
Not so far AS ! know" answered the witness.
il also appeared that IN the cases where the
shortages occurred the iudorsement Of Justice
Francis j. Worcester appeared on the papers, stat
Ing the cases to be- OF the nature which accorded
with the character Of the fees turned over 10y Du
Mahaut. Bell insisted that Justice Worcester did
not follow the rule that most OF tho Justices dd.
Justice Worcester said that the clerk was in a
position 10 know better the character Of a case
than the Justice lie Insisted on going into long
explanation Of hts understanding Of the matter
and was interrupted 10y Justice Van Brunt who
asked:
II understand you to admit that there was a con-
fct between your entry and the rules
yes" replied the Justice.
And the clerks charge was made in accordance
With your entry asked Justice Van Brunt
'Yos"
in response TO further questions, Justice Worces-
ter admitted making the Inducements. lie said
there were no fling cases IN court He reluctantly
admitted that many Of the records were loosely
piled up on the floor.
Mr. Flynn asked If the records could not have
been properly kept. even II they Were piled up on
the floor A. this Presiding Justice Van Brnt
showed some irritation. and said.
we are as much experts as the witness IS a.
TO whether accounts could have been properly
kept"
Lawyer Mayer then moved that The charges
against Du Mahaut bee dismissed.
Presiding Justice Van Brunt dryly remarked ttat
It would be- better ii Du Mahaui was called TO the
stand.
Du MaAaui testified that bee was appointed clerk
of the Eleventh. District Municipal Court on Malcl
j. lSGs There WAS Judgment docket in when
10 keep the fun records lie mad frequently APP
piled for O Judgment dock' from the city author-
ties. and tine, failed 90 provide him with one. tte
predecessor of Justice Worcester Justice DaNtn-
port WIS a. supporter Of Governor Black There
courtroom. who said that Justice Worcester wanted
TO have Du Mahaut removed as To appoint
Homer h. Wilson. 80 attempt however was
made to bring this ont in the evidence though 81
In bis testimony Mr. Du Mahauf said be- Wa.
not aware that there were any charges against
llm until Aprh B. when he 81" +2n' t""t about Il
in an evening newspaper lie had up TO mat time
received 40 official communication from the com
missioner ~ Accounts that Doc Wa short Ir his
accounts on the morning ~ Ar4 ir deposited
because he Thought that this money Vas due the
lie explained that in cases whore the amount in-
voyed in litigation was 81 and under. g. 80 WAS
paid 10 the court I'm every case ~ cents was
paid go tne city Wher" the amounts involved
We're over 50. then 81 Was paid into court. II the
plaintiff won. thc s. th, g was repaid go hiln.
Al that tine city got iu those cases and could get
Was % cents. Du Allhaut said that hc Was "a
when this money Wa demanded iie had a right
10 keep This money TO await the issue ~ the case.
This explanation seemed To- satisfy the Justices,
bui question ly Justice Barrett brought ont q
fact that was not so satisfactory
Justice Barrett asked about the fees iu some
twenty appeal cases iu which s. had been de-
posted. Du Malaut gave au explanation which
did not seem TO explain When The case Wa closed
thc Court took the matter under adviscment