The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-11
Warren M. Brown Still Continues Testimony
tcontinued from Page D

animation by Speciai FIoSeCuSoA Hugh M. Alcorn.
 Accepted Diversions
 "The auditors accepted diversions from the surplus resource sinking fund to the general fund as an ad- dition," the witness testified. He l; expected to be on the stand fol several weeks, under direct exam nation, and for an indeterminable period under cross-examination.
 In connection with his testimony concerning diversions" the witness referred to payments of $l3,O00 and $25.5OO to John s. Johnston, a de- fendant, which were charged to the appropriation for interest on float ing indebtedness. He followed his testimony, to the effect that the payments should not have been charged to that appropriation, with a description of the manner in which funds were later transferred to the same appropriation to wipe out a deficit.
 Similar Reference
 Similar reference was made m connection with payments to former City Court Judge John F. McGrath $4,500; former Mayor William F Thorns, $2,5OO; and Johnston, $7.OOO The payments were made In 193z and 1883, he said.
 The court and jurq watched m- tently as Brown sat quietly on the witness stand and reeled oil a lengthy stry involving references tc thousands of dollars, and technical bookkeeping procedure. Spectators in the courtroom were at bare minimum-less than a dozen.
 Transfers Approved
 Browns testimony showed that the transfers, in many instances were approved by the board of sink ing fund commissioners, of which he was treasurer, and of which the members of the board of finance were also incumbents.
 Several letters to the board, signed simply treasurer" requesting trans fers from the sinking fund to the general fund, for listed purposes were read into the record by Brown In one instance, where it was re- lated that Leary had requested a transfer for the payment of 8 float ing debt. Brown claimed that one of the items could not possibly have been a floating indebtedness.
 Should Not Accept Them
 Following testimony concerning transfers of funds, and with refer ence to the audits of the Kingsley Company, Brown said that the transfers should not have been ac- cepted by the auditors, and that the auditors" reports were not correct. Attempts by defense counsel to have the statement stricken from the records were futile. Nowhere in any of the reports were the transactions commented en-" con- tinued Brown.
 A remark by Brown, however, to the effect that the surplus re- source sinking fund was used oon- trary to the provisions of section 9S of the city charter" was omitted on orders of Judge Inglis.
 Crary III
 John H. Crary, tax assessor, was reported to be i'll this morning, as tbe court session was delayed in ouening. He declined to ask for recess, however, and the trial pro ceeded.
 Warren M. Brown, states ac- countant, who is expected to be on the stand many weeks, resumed his testimony where he left off at 4:30 o'clock yesterday. He first noted an error of $l,000 in the Waterbury budget for 1881, with relation to the police department item. The budg- ct checked, however, he said.
 Attorney George w. Crawford raised the objection that the witt ness was testifying from a book which was neither marked for iden- tification nor available to the in- spection of the defense counsel. He added that the witness had testi- fled from similar document or a previous occasion, commenting that some of Browns testimony had been erroneous, with reference to a tax rate.
 Whereupon, Special Prosecutor Alcorn had books of the city budget appropriations marked for identifi- cation and ordered MT. Brown to allow defense counsel to examine them at any time they were con- venienced.
 :. Figures Compared
 Brown was then called upon to compare the figures he considered the correct picture of the over ex- penditures of city appropriations, with the over expenditures as list- ed by the George H. Kingsley au- ditors.
 Starting with 1881, he said that the difference between his figures and those of the auditors were $171, ,709.16.t He said that the re- port, made by the Miller Franklin Company, who were succeeded by Kingsley, listed transfers of $780, 900 from the special school fund and $2l, ,709.16 from the surplus re- source sinking fund, to the general funds.
 Brown noted from the city char ter that no appropriations from sinking funds shall be made to pay current bills during any fiscal year.
 Under date of December 30, 1881 was the record on a journal of the transfer of $21, ,709.31 to the general fund from the sinking fund. The $150,000 transfer from the special school fund to the general fund was also noted on the journals of the city.
 Those two items represented di- versions ." said Brown, as he was cut off by a chorus of defense objections. Judge Inglis refused to strike out the statement, which AL corn said he desired to stand.
 Brown referred to the auditors report for the year 1881, when the alleged diversions were made. Con- corning the report, he said, "The auditors accepted the diversion from the surplus resource to the