Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-12-05

+ James Gardner, George Bowman, 4
y o. N. Stohl, ~ w, Kimball, Z
+ Thomas Ruse A. Singleton. n.y. +
]. ram Perry and Joseph Christen- I
!. SEN +
Observation-Disclosures
Judge Marshall's court this morning
took upon itself the aspect of an
arithmetic class, five of counsel, de-
fendant, several jurymen and the court
being actively engaged with pad anG
pencil in arriving at correct sou-
tons 10 sums In simple addition and
subtraction. The proceedings In the
case of the United States against
Charles Meighan, former postmaster
at Ogden, charged with misappropria-
ton Of government moneys, were slight
ly mixed this morning, in fact at stated
intervals Judge Marshall would take
q hand in examining witnesses in OIL
der to arrive at an understanding re-
gerding certain credits and debts in
the balance sheet which was the out
come OF the auditing of the accounts
of the postotllcc last April by several
inspectors for the government.
A. Il. Frederick, postoffce inspector
ut Denver, occupied the witness stand
nearly all the morning and a part OF
the afternoon session. During the
course of his testimony he frankly stat
"a that the accounts of the Ogden post
Office under the regime Of Charles
Meighan were kept in very loose
manner. so much so that to this day 1t
was impossible to locate In which de-
pertinent the alleged deficiency occur
red He also testified on cross-exam-
iratian that on Jan. l OF this year the
auditing department at Washington
had sent q balance sheet TO Ogden
wherein Melghan was credited with
the sum OF si32 which the latter had
enormously charged against his OF
flee in q subsequent report sent into
headquarters.
The case is being stubbornly contest
ed by counsel and 1t 10 evident thus
early that the defense will place great
stress upon Meighans apparent ignor-
arce of the principles Of elementary
bookkeeping.
Among the interested spectators In
tho court room were Mrs. Meighan and
her little daughter.
INSPECTOR FREDERICK.
The first witness called this morning
was A. B. Frederick, postofiice inspee-
tor. with headquarters at Denver, VINO
upon taking the witness stand proceed
ed to produce bulky package OF mem
oranda for the purpose OF refreshing
his memory. This was objected TO by
Judge McGlnnis on behalf Of defendant,
whose appeal to the court did not have
the desired effect Ir answer to ques-
lions witness went on TO state the re-
suits Of his auditing the books taking
each item separately between the dates
of January | and April 10 inclusive. The
various items, stated witness, on the
debit side aggregated S3i.15s.iS, the
credit In favor Of the Ogden postofiice
was S333l0.G3. leaving dinerepce OF
81 ALSO.
Witness said he informed Meighan
OF the difference In the balance sheet
when defendant said, well guess | am
up against It."
Continuing witness said: II asked
Meighan whether he was prepared to
pay this difference and he said mol am
not | then said we shall be compelled
10 call on your sureties to make up tho
difference
Did Meighan say anything else?"
Eyes, he said that there must be
some mistake somewhere"
did he mean that your figures were
incorrectg'
II presume not. for he said that he
knew that our totals were correct"
Witness went on TO declare that de-
PENDANT stated that he could not &C.
count for the discrepancy In the totals
and affirmed that there must be a mis-
take somewhere, but just how the mis-
take had occurred he was at loss TO
explain.
AT subsequent conversation asked
him TO come TO the postoiiice and as
sist US In the investigation and az the
same time asked him why he had treat
ed us 80 discourteously In staying away
from the office. He replied that he
had been so completely knocked out. or
words to that effect, that he did not
feel like being around; also he had been
away up at the Hermitage with parry
of Elks."
FREDERICKS CROSS EXAMINED
on cross examination by Judge Nc.
Ginnls witness stated that in Decem-
Der, 1901, he. in conjunction with In
spectors Simmons and Sharp, made a
detailed inspection Of the Ogden post
office, when they found deficit OF
about 5000, but II was impossible to de-
termine In which department this de-
nciency originated. owing TO an irregu-
larity In the transfer Of accounts. Moth
ing was done until the accounts had
been properly audited. The defendant
az this time averred that he was not
thoroughly posted, as 10 the proper
way In which 10 keep the books. Not
wishing 10 work an injustice on
Melghan, witness said they referred
the matter to the auditors Office at
Washington. II also developed that the
postmaster at Ogden had considerable
moneys 10 pay out In advance OF that
received, one item being approximately
Sl4.0O0 q quarter for salaries OF the
railroad mail clerks. Witness stated
that loose methods had been ~ go
In the ogden postofiice and when one
department was short OF funds the
money was taken from another de-
partment and no written record kept
OF the transfers In the face Of this
state OF affairs no formal demand was
made on the defendant for the 5000 de-
fcit OF December. To this day witness
said he had not been able to locate In
which department the deficiency be-
longed.