The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1918-11-28
GRAHAM. WILLIAMS AND HAN
LEY, STATE AT VERMONT OF
FICERS, PUT UNDER BAIL FOR
TRIAL ON SERIOUS CHARGES.

FICERS, PUT UNDER BAIL Fol
TRIAL ON SERIOUS CHARGES
Gov. Graham, Formerly State Auditor
Charged with EmbezzIement ant
Larceny; State Purchasing Agent
Hanley with Larceny and with
Fraudulently Taking Money; Bank
Commissioner Williams Charged
with Malfeasance.
Following the appearance of Gov
Horace +. Graham in Washington
county court on charges of embezzle-
ment and larceny and the setting of
his trial at the March, 1919, term of
the court, Frank C. Williams, state
bank commissioner, and Dewey t.
Hanley, state purchasing agent, APP
peared in the same tribunal, the form
err on the charge of malfeasance in
office and Hanley on charges Of fraud
ulently taking money and with lar
ceny of the amounts named. The
trials of Williams and Hanley are set
for December 18th, or as soon as the
work of the court permits. These
appearances were the result of the
presentation Of evidence before the
special grand jury at Montpelier dur
ing the past week.
Governor Grahams trial will come
after he has retired from the Office of
chief executive of the state. his term
expiring by limitation early in Janu-
airy. Meanwhile bail of $4,000 is fur
nished by Frank M. Cory Of Mont
pelier, and H. w. Varnum of Jeffer-
sonville and Barre.
Graham is charged with 1872 counts,
of which 10 are for alleged embezzle
ment, while he was serving the state
of Vermont as auditor. The date of
the first larceny charge is April 80,
1913, and the date of the last larceny
charge is January 5, 1917. The first
embezzlement charge is date April 16,
1915, and the last ENLIGHTENMENT
charge, January 5, 1917. The 1872
counts of the larceny charge name
total of $39,455.90, but there are vouch-
ers which reduce the amount to about
$4,000. The sum of $19,SS0 has re-
Gently been placed in the state treas
urer's hands, SO that restoration of
those funds has been practically COM
pleted, it is claimed.
Governor Graham came to county
court without the formality of papers
having been served on him. In fact,
there was some doubt in the minds of
attorneys whether a warrant could
have been served upon him while gov
ernor. He was represented IN court
by Attorney Rufus E. Brown, of Bur-
lington.
On Judge Stanton's query if there
was business to be disposed of, Attor
ney General Barber stated that he
understood Governor Graham was
present to furnish bail in the indict-
ment which the grand jury had found
against him. The attorney general
explained the number of the counts,
after which he said that bail of s. 900
was satisfactory to the state. There
upon, that sum was fixed by the court,
and Messrs. Cory and Varnum were
recognized as surety.
Attorney Brown then asked for a
continuance of the trial until the
March term of court on the ground
that he has many cases pending in
supreme court, as well as in other
courts. Attorney General Barber
stated that he had hoped the case
would the tried about the middle of
January before he (Mr. Barber) left
Office and that he did not want TO try
the case while Governor Graham was
in Office. Mr.. Brown, in turn, urged
that the case go to the March term
because it would probably be long
trial and Mr.. Barber would go out of
office before the case was completed if
the trial was started in January. The
court called conference on the mat
ter and then announced that as the
state did not further oppose he would
grant continuance TO the March
.erm.