The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-12
Warren Brown Made
 Serious Accusations
Continued from Page D

A~AA SoS ~
 Under date of December 31, of the same year were listed payments to- talling $3,e00 to former Mayor Fran cis P. Guilfoile, the witness said, also traced through the reconcilia- ton sheets.
 Another payment to Guilfoile, dated December 3l, 1886, for $4,925 was charged to the appropriation for court costs, according to pen cilled notation on the appropria- tion ledger, the witness said.
 The annual appropriation for the department was $2,550, the witness said, but in 1887 there was a total of $33, ,325.44 spent, representing an overdraft of $50, ,775.44.
 One payment in 1887, under date of December 21. was to the firm of Carmody & Thoms for $17,000. The payment appeared under date of November g on the warrants pay able sheets.
 Turning then to the financial de- partment of the controllers office he dealt with the administration section yesterday, Brown testified to overdrafts of appropriations in every year with the exception of 1930-1931 and 1887. The total net over expenditure of the department during the years 1930-l937 was $221 ,2O1.18, Brown stated.
 There were underexpenditureS of $11 ,288. .98 in 1930 $27O.44 in 1881. The overexpenditures in 1892 were $84,- 870.60; in 1888, $25 ,2s1 or; 1894, $19,- O26.8O; 1885, $88,31413; 1886, $17,- 388.87. There was an underexpendi- ture of $2,1OO87 in 1887, he said.
 Floating Debt
 It was directly following that tes- timony that Alcorn turned Browns attention specifically to the item of interest on floating debt" por- ton of that particular appropria- ton.
 In 1880, the witness said, the in- terest on floating debt item was m- derexpended b. $9,777.46; in 1881, by $52321. But tn 1892 it was over- expended by $43,077.17; 1883 by $1S,- GOO; 1884 by SIT 7,O34.42; 1886 by STA l05. .46; 1886 by $6,201.3l; 1887 by $1O,811.16.
 Asked by Acorn if the auditors should have checked all the inter est paid on loans, and reported the actual payments charged as such, Brown said that such procedure should have been followed. Tt was not done, however" he continued.
 In answer to a question of Alcorn, whether large sums were charged to interest on the floating debt,-which were not in fact interest-Brown voiced an emphatic "Yes".
 He definitely stated that the amount charged to the appropria- ton exceeded the amount of actual interest paid.
 Referring to 1937 appropriation ledger, Brown pointed out pay ment of $1 300 to Corporation Coun- sel Charles s. O'Connor, under date of May 3l. The explanation on the appropriation ledger was that the payment was for Legislative ex- penses," and in connection with trips to New York and Boston, rela- tive o loans. The warrants payable sheet for the item was missing, Brown said.
 Under date of May 29, 1887, a pay ment of $7,500 to former Judge John F. McGrath was charged to the interest on floating debt, the witness stated.
 During the testimony of Brown, Alcorn asked him a question con- corning a payment made in 1885 and the witness, without responding to the question stated that he wished to refer to another item.
 Overruled
 Attorney John H. Cassidy object ed, stating that there was no ques- ton pending and no occasion for the witness to make statement. But he was overruled.
 Under date of December 30 1885, an entry of $26,825 appeared, in payment to the law firm Carmody & Thoms. Records, including war; rants payable sheets and the check were available, Brown said, but the sheet was dated March 5, 1886, while the check had been cashed Feb ruary 20.
 Another payment, of $11,000 to Spellacy and YoemanS, of which law firm Mayor Thomas Spellacy of Hartford was senior partner, was listed, under date of June 21, 1885. The payment was charged to inter- est on floating debt, although as state witness here more than a week ago, Spellacy said that the services he performed consisted of keeping the Democratic members of the general assembly together on matters.
 Numerous payments to John s. Johnston, New York broker and de- fendant in the trial, were listed by Brown, as aggregating $161 ,162.06, during the eight years period. These payments were chargeable to the interest on floating indebtedness