The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-05-28

Mr.. Johnson's testimony revealed moth
ing of significance
The examination of Chief Deputy Audi
tor Griswold by Mr. Somerby was, per-
maps, the most effective Of the tedious
day.
GRISWOLD ON RACK.
Mr.. Griswold testified to an intimate
friendship with James H Burns which
extended over period of fifteen years,
but in that time he had Hsver had any
significant talk with the former county,
auditor as to tax refundments He sees
Mr. Burns around the county auditors
Office almost daily. and knows that he
has free access to the county auditors
records, as Mr.. Burns himself ties flied.
MT Gr1swold's memory did not appear
to be in the best of condition We tt rday,
and IT was impossible for him to recall
now much money has been paid as re-
tundments since the beginning Of John
sons term as auditor. Neither could be
recollect anything of special tie about
the L1ghtner deal and the cases OF
Duc1us, Davis and Cassidy He could
not at first recall having seen Uieir az
pHcations, and was never aware that Hr.
Burns was in any wise conn acted with
the deal. In the same connection Mr..
GrlsWold stated, however, that he had
never notified Burns or ANYBODY e Sc
that certain certificates had been approx
ed after they came back from the state
auditors office. Despite his disloyal
memory, he was able to perfectly Iden-
tlty all the applications of which mention
has just been made He e. 50 observed
that these applications had not been veri-
he'd as the law requires them to be-
RESPONSIBILITY IS SHIFTED.
Mr.. Griswold said he never examined
a petition for an abatement of taxes to
see If it was all right, and laid !he re-
sponslbllity Of that at the Eoor Of the
state auditor and attorney general. This
old not coincide with Attistant Attorney
General Somerby's view, who held that
the county attorney was available for
counsel with the county officials
Ihe matter of framing warrants. Mr.
Gr1sWold said, was in his province, but
ne denied any further responsibility in
the matter.
Probably the most str, king piece Of
evidence adduced was contained in the
following testimony of Griswold. Somer-
by asked him if he could identify the war
rant made out by Carl Ducius to his at
torney, H. C. Weiss He could. He had
given the instruction to Drummond to
draw this very warrant
Upon what authority was that instruc-
ton given?' asked Somerby.
ON the verbal authority Of the man
making the application" replied Girls
void, and this man turned out to be Mr..
Burns
Did you know that Burns had the right
to give you this authority, Mr.. Girls
wold?'
Il do not know whether he did not or
not"
Yet in the face of this admission that
he was uniformed as to Burns right to
advise in the matter, Mr.. Grswold ac-
knowledges that he prccee ded to hand
over the warrants to Weiss as attorney
for Ducius.
Another very strange transaction was
revealed by Griswolds own statements.
He said that he did not know that the
Duc1us warrants had been paid, yet he
had stated prior to this that it was his
province to handle these warrants. He
confessed that it was a surprise to him
to learn that the Duc.us application had
been honored and the warrants for the
money presented to his attorney Weiss.
The only way in which he could account
for this was by saying that it must have
been a clerical error He said that Mr.
Burns told him nothing of the Ducius
application and he simply ordered Drum
mond to draw the warrants for the whole
batch, without knowing or taking the
pains to ascertain that Ducius applica-
lions were in the batch
do you consider that a safe method Of
dealing with the county's revenues" ask
ed Attorney Somerby.
well, 1 would be willing to do that
very same way again and take my
chances on it,, replied Griswold.
GRISWOLD'S WIRES CROSSED.
Mr.. Griswold became very much tan
gled in his testimony in undertaking to
explain to Attorney Somerby the where
abouts of the certificates at the time the
Ducius, Davis and Cassidy warrants were
drawn. He said at one time they were
lying on his desk and he, thinking Drum
mond had them put away som where,
told the latter the warrants were all right
and to go ahead and issue them Not
knowing what Griswold thought, Drum
mond, so Griswold says was under the
impression that Griswold had the certi-
ficates or he would never have ordered
the warrants to be issued GriswoId ad-
mitted that the certificates were missing
at the time the warrants were drawn
and that they are still missing, but said
they would turn UP some day. Here Gen.
Pope called attention to the law which
requires the certificates to be in evil
dence at the time the warrants are drawn.
Gen. Pope declared that the warrants
were issued April 70, and that he oa.lld at
the county auditor office on May 5, and
every day thereafter, until the 9th, for
the certificates, or at least his deputy
did, and the certificates could not be OBJ
tained.
AS to the warrants issued to Attorney
Schoonmaker, Mr. Griswold said he had
the written authority of Walter Davis TO
make these warrants out to his attorney.
The warrants that went to SchoOnmaker,
as the attorney for Carl Ducius, were is
sued upon the verbal authority of Ducius,
who accompanied Schoonmaker to the
office. Burns was not present at the
time Of this transaction.
Regarding the certificate called for in
the last warrant, Griswold admitted he
did not see 1t, though he was able to
identify the warrant by his signature.
Included in those warrants for which
the certificates are still missing is one,
No. 6218, issued to Schoonmaker for
DUcius, in the sum of $4,87206 Griswold
identified this warrant, and said he be-
lleVed it was drawn by him on April 30.
AS a matter of fact, he said the war
rant was drawn to Schoonmaker before
the certificate had been delivered at the
office of the county auditor. But Mr..
Griswold adds that this was not his fault
1t was his duty, he states, to see that
these certificates were properly vouched
for. This he charges up as another
clerical error.
HADN'T FAVORED BURNS.
Asked If he had not baen In the ha hit