Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1919-01-02
WILLIAMS KNEW Of
SHORTAGE IN 1912
Testimony of Dep. Auditor JOS
lyn Who Talked With Him
About Graham Matter
AUDITOR GATES ON STAND
Says Commissioner Williams Told Him
He Had known of Balances Against
Graham For Years

Montpelier. Jan. 1.-State Auditor
Benjamin Gates, testifying to-day in the
trial of Bank Commissioners Frank c.
Williams. charged with malfeasance
in Office said that he had conversed
with Williams about the balance against
Horace F. Graham when the latter was
auditor and that williams had told
him he Lad known for several years
that there had been balances against
Mr.. Graham; that he would have the
matter fixed up and that he had talk
ed to Graham about the matter and
had written him once on the subject.
Auditor Gates also testified that he
knew of no way in which vouchers can
be furnished for the two items of 1900
and s1,SO0 which were charged to ad-
vances to the highway department. He
said these are not vouchered at the pres
ent time and he could see no way that
they can be.
Auditor Gates, ]. e. Joslyn and John
Wallace of the auditors office were the
witnesses of the day. Mr.. Joslyn
sprung a surprise when he testified that
in 1912 Williams talked over the Gra-
ham shortage with him and that he
told Joslyn he would take the matter
W. with Ahl. IclhtlNt "
out the affairs. The case
opens up the alleged shortage in the
charges against Mr.. Graham and in
fact most of the evidence has to do with
that subject.
JOSLYN'S TESTIMONY
Deputy Auditor j. f. Joslyn told the
jury that in 1912 he called Mr. Williams
attention to the balance against Mr.. Gra-
ham and that he wished it would be
Strengthened up. He said Mr. Williams
replied that he would take it up with
Mr.. Graham. The witness further said
that he had called the matter to Mr..
Williams attention probably five or six
times between that time and June 30,
1916
The defense again in cross-eXamination
tried to get before the jury the fact that
Mr.. Graham had done nothing out of the
ordinary in making advances to depart
ments claiming it had been the custom
for many years preceding Mr.. Grahams
time and since then, but the State OBJ
iected to this. The defense said that
the State had shown a part of the sys-
TEN in the auditors office. They wanted
to show the who's system and that the
custom of yAal1ing advances was a part
of it.
Joslyn further testified THAT changes
were made in the record by him at Mr..
Grahams orders after the latter had left
the office. but that Mr.. Gates was not
consulted in making the changes. He
showed that the balances were not car
ried over from year to year excepting
N,241 in June 1915; 1888 in 1911; and s339S.91
in 1916 The defense contested the ad-
missibiity of the ledger as evidence
showing the changing Of figures on the
ledger. contending that the witness was
unable to tell when it was done or by
whom or at what times. However that
portion of the ledger that was then in
court was admitted as evidence. subject
to the objections of the defense.
The system of filing the vouchers and
receipts was explained, the witness going
on to show that there is a double receipt
for all money expended and that while
the receipt covers the payment of the
money, the itemized account was purely
to show distribution of the expenditure.
Those pages Of the ledger in which the
auditor of accounts, personal expenditures
were carriede was the subject of test-
mony all the morning. The shortage
would not show in the receipts but would
In the items of expense. The witness tes-
titled there was no concealment in the way
the books were kept by the previous audi
tor. He had no knowledge of his own ac-
count relative to the red letters. He tes-
titled that the S33939l was the overdue
balance June 30, 1916, and that the S5,34S.35
came to the office later He testified
that from 1910 to June 30, 1916, the total
amount of over balance due the State was
sl2 003,47, which did net take into consid-
GRAFTON the 5000 alleged TO have gone to
the highway department The defense
asked the witness relative to the 81. 393,41
shown on the books and had him identify
a paper upon which were other figures
relative to the same period and the attor-
ney for the defense came back smiling
when he obtained the admission of that
piece of evidence, without exception from
the State.
JOHN WALLACE'S TESTIMONY
John Wallace. bookkeeper in the office
of the auditor both during Mr.. Graham's
and Mr.. Gates reign. testified during the
afternoon that he was bookkeeper be-
May 1913 until now. The entries
in the disburslng ledger are in his hand
writing He also testified as to the
method of keeping the books and to all
against Mr.. Graham in differ
ent years. some of when were carried
forward. He explained a voucher for
s9S7.47 that seemed to have been changed.
He testified that the balance June 80,
1916 amounted to S3,393.91. He testified he
did not know what vouchers were pre-
sented to Williams, for him TO check
He testified that June 80, 1914 Mr.. Graham
over vouched s40l7i and June 90 1915.
$57.47. He explained that the distrbu-
tion ledger IL made from the files and
vouchers.
When the State tried to introduce
evidence to show how the day book ia
kept the defense objected, claiming the
book Is the best evidence, and the court
sustained the objection. Mr., Wallace
testified that the total amount of un-
balance from July l, 1919, to
June 80, 1915, WAS s3,393.01,
AUDITOR GATES
Benjamin Gates as auditor was re-
called and explained the form Of the
orders used during the years of 1908
to 1915,
The question as to any balance
against Mr., Graham in 1903 was oh
jected tn by the defense but Mr., Gates
was allowed ia answer but not as to
how much, because the records are the
best evidence.
The defense objected to evidence
relative to 1907 because it was a year