Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1920-01-29

brought out tending to show any Sun.
preston of evidence by the State Mr.
Gates stated he gathered what jnforma-
ton he had about the conducting of the
auditors office from Mr.. Joslyn and the
other clerks in the office. Mr.. Stickney
directed his attention to the auditors
books and to the method of bookkeepins
and asked questions to show that the
books were kept in the same manner
after Mr.. Graham left the office in 1911
as before.
HAS PAID STATE s19.Sso.4s
In cross-examination Mr. Gates testified
that he knew, by obtaining the same from
the treasurer's records that Mr.. Graham
has paid to the State $19SS0.4S. This sum
Is larger than the sum which the State
showed yesterday was not covered by
vouchers. In addition to this Mr. Gates
could not tell whether there was also a
$500 item which Mr. Graham had paid
to the State that was not included in
those items which the witness had given
Mr.. Graham credit for. Mr. Stickney for
the second time during the morning
charged that only part of the story was
being given to the jury and inquired of the
witness if he was mindful of his oath
when he gave some of the information.
Objection was made and the question
withdrawn
Mr.. Gates testified that he obtained
from the treasurer's books data showing
that on May 3, 1918 Mr.. Graham paid the
State $500, May % 800, June 81 s2754l,
November Is sl1 ,1O5.O7, making a total OF
SIG. SSO4S. There was considerable discus
sion about these figures, after which Mr..
ke1
pay the State June Is, 1913. 5000, which
Mr. Gates agreed was paid, making
total of sl9,SS0.4s. Later Mr. Gates was
asked if he did not know in the aggre-
gate there was amounting to $5,34s. IS that
Mr.. Graham had paid to the State, but
the witness said he did not know of such
credit Mr. Gates was asked if that
sum was allowed if it would not reduce
the balance. The witness admitted such
would be the result
The witness was asked if he had any
reason for emitting any of the figures
and the witness stated that he was not
asked about them. He did not person.
ally know that the amount that had
been paid to the treasurer and only had
the figures that the persons in that Of
flee had given him. He did not know
anything about a SLIGO item being paid.
any reason why he should try to with
hold the facts from the jury which was
not answered, objection being made by
the State.
GATES STILL INTERESTED.
He testified he had never said anything
to Mr.. Graham about the payments, there
being no occasion as long as the money
was coming into the office. When asked
w ic n N he
Mr. Gates testified that it had not ceased
yet.
The matter of the Greensboro Gull
road was then taken up. No special
examination had been made by the
witness in this matter and he did
not know whether the account ball
anced in 1911. There was considerable
argument between the attorneys rela.
tive to whether the testimony was ad.
missable, the State claiming that Mr..
Gates had only identified the records
The defense claimed the matter was
in court and it had the right to cross
examine, but the court ruled not at
this time and directed that the de.
Tense had the right to cross examine
later. Mr. Barber having stated that
the matter would be again under con-
sideration. Mr.. Stickney offered to
show that information was being
withheld to which Mr.. Barber too took
exceptions, There being no question
pending further debate was ceased
Mr.. Gates testified then as to the uni
formity of the Mr.. Grahams keeping
his accounts and the word advances"
occurred frequently for the first time
to any extent on the part of any
States witness.
Mr.. Gates testified that in taking the
orders receipts and vouchers items from
the books he took them exactly as they
were shown on the books excepting ir
one instance and that was in voucher
4JOl i'm which there was a credit to MIR.
Graham, but the witness did not know
the credit. At this time the sum of
S5,S4S.35 came into consideration, as stated
above. Mr.. Stickney inquired if there
was any reason why this was not eX-
planned, to which the witness testified
he was not asked about it. The jury
seems to be taking much more interest
than it has in the last few days.
Howard A. Skinner of Norrisvile wa,
on the stand about 10 minutes during
the morning. There was no cross ex.
animation and the startling evidence
which was expected he would produce
did not materialze He stated that hs
had known Mr. Graham since 1890 and
had been in business with him sine,
1898 and he said he knew Frank Q
Williams. He testified he went to Mr.
Graham's house one Sunday in Febru.
AIRY in 1910 and that Mr.. Graham show.
ed him a letter. He could not recall
it's Substance but did recall one
phrase in it namely, lin duty to your
self and your State you ought to fly
this up" He did not see the signature
of the letter but supposed it was from
Mr.. Williams, He thought Mr.. Graham
said So Then Mr.. Graham asked II
there was any lumber to be shipped
at that time,
1t was not brought out in testimony
what the phrase, referred to, was con.
nected with.
There was no cross examination
which apparently surprised the State
and conference took place between
attorneys. Then Mr.. skinner was ask
ed II he knew anything about a check
ing account in the st. Johnsbury bank
He replied he did not.