Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1920-01-29
0VERDRAFTS SHOWN
TO GRAHAM JURY
Auditor Gates Testifying From
Files Indicates Years When
Former Auditors Orders Re-
veal Sums Exceeding Vouchers

Montpelier, Jan. 23.-The progress oil the
trial of Horace +. Graham, ex-governor
OF Vermont, charged with larceny anu
embezzlement of State funds during 1910
to 1917 when he was State auditor was
more rapid than heretofore. One Oh the
important things brought out was the
fact that when State Treasurer w. II.
Scott testified there was nothing suspic-
ious In the orders that Mr.. Graham drew
and which passed through his office. 1t
also was brought out that Mr.. Graham
had made no advances to other depart
ments than his own and the highway de-
partment, but this matter was not settled
and it Is expected that more testimony
will appear on these subjects later in
the trial.
During the afternoon the vouchers and
orders in the files between the above
dates were introduced in court. These
showed that the accounts were carried
through the year and that there was
sometimes a balance in favor of Mr..
Graham one year, and then one in FAVOR
of the State. Evidence introduced thus
far shows orders for which there were
no vouchers in 1913 1896 1916. A,f5s93,
while in 1914 the state owed him S4ol IA
and in 1915 he owed the state s692.56. The
nSureS LOT the last nal Sea' VI i'i" "''o
not compiled.
The State was allowed to amend It's IN
dictment changing the dates in three
icounts in embezZlement so that the rec
ords of the Indictment would comply with
the dates on the vouchers The court in
giving decision stated 1t was not apparent
the amendment would affect the matter.
Auditor Gates was recalled to the wit
mess stand and testified more about the
vouchers. several sets of which were
shown to the jury for the purpose OF Civ
ing them definite information or now the
business is generally conducted in the
office.
Order number S,S22 was introduced snow
ing no voucher covering the expense ana
salary. This is one of the famous lost
vouchers to Which Wlde puDllcity was
given when the news originally broke in
the newspapers. one of which was found
tucked away in a drawer in one OF the
desks. Mr. Gates stated there were seY-
eral vouchers missing
The witness testified for the year end
ing June 30 1913, the orders drawn by MI.
Graham amounted to slo,9sn49 whlIe the
vouchers amounted to S,S4i.33 or Mr..
Graham overdrew sl.'a3 10 more than ms
vouchers accounted for The account Tor
that fiscai year was offered. lie testlfied
there were not receipts TOT all orders
drawn
Relative to the account ending 1917
June 3Oth Mr.. Gates testitled relative
TO Graham salar! ana other expenses
connected with the ofilce which
amounted to Ss,2o9o6 Whlle ms Nouch'
ers amounted 10 cue SAM sun. W
iorcad 70 hin, tha total orders amount.
20 eso- al CO that tbe state owed hin
sAo1 "a or in other words he had IN.
dor drawn his account s4O,74 He Their
Testified about the wear ending June
oo 1e1h tho vouchers of which amount.
ed 70 s1O.263.O7 while he testified the
orders amounted TO S1Oo97 05. Later he
Iexplained there was an amount carried
forward so that he would have to re.
yise the figure to read s9.755.63. with
this cbanee the oyerdraw was s5O7 "a
instead of a balance Mr.. Graham hat
left in the State funds. This overdraft
of s5O74 "A did not take into considera
ton the $1,000 highway department
item If it did there would appear ar
overdrart of s69256
The account of the year ending Jun,
30. 1916. was then taken up. The tota
orders for that year amounted to $12,-
9555l while the vouchers were fol-
SlO29S.5S or difference of $2,659.23
This does not take into consideration
the $500 highway department order
This added Mr. Graham owed the Stat,
$4,45923
, The figures were not compiled from
, June 30. 1915 to January 7. 1917. Thi:
testimony will be put in later.
THE MORNING SESSION
, .r, -. ,o,. -,
5 Nv ,'''' .'''e ra>,',. -,
3 WV" nc s''''y"' " SO. A.
w. So any ~ -.
3 Hco', 'cs'ineu rela'iVe ~ 'i.e ~
lahu''hs orue's iio''i the auu''o' !" 1T"
, ONCE ne saio II IL no u''eien. nov
t man wien 'nr' uIana'' va "uui'o'
r heiatiFe 10 'he s''@" anu $i'o" o'oe'
q maze 10 me n'eh"ds uepai ''"th,' 'n'
= WITNESS test''ied that ne hau maui ao
: Vances on the audltor 10 the hlsh"a!
department objection was nhaue o'
the state out the court aIio"eo 'h'
[ question TO stand
5 inc report OF the state treasurer "a'
8 SHOWN TO the witness from Wh'ch 1T
t read reiund maze ny I. W. rates Whei
I state highway commissioner OF saS"'
{ upon the auoitor oroer previously ora"h
, op1ectioh was MADE put the answer Wa'
Q aiio"eo'
| Attorney Barber spent much hme II
= explaining the law, 10 whieh MI ''o',ch'