The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-23

any action by committee or other wise aside from what you have al- ready readT' queried Alcorn.
 No, sir" was the reply.
 Insisting again that the complete record of that meeting of the board of aldermen be admitted to evil dence, Attorney Crawford stated that Alcorn was calling for an in- depreciation of the acts of the board at the meeting.
 Rules of Evidence Alcorn said that he was glad to enter the whole book, and offered it. But Crawford insisted that he only wanted the records of the sim gle meeting, and Alcorn said, Well mark anything that MT. Crawford wants"
 T don't want anything by way of grace from the states attorney or even the court" returned Crawford. T only ask that the rules of evidence be followed"
 Judge Inglis then ordered that the records of the meeting of the board of aldermen for July ', 1880, con- taining the request of Mayor Hayes for permission to execute utilities contracts, be marked an exhibit.
 Special Prosectour Alcorn then examined Brown concerning pay ments by the city to the George H. Kingsley Co.
 S2,500 Appropriated
 Payments to the Kingsley Con- pany auditors, three of whose members are on trial. totalled be- tween 1883 and 1887, $1lS,239.90 al- though the appropriation for audit ing each of the years was only $2,- 800 the witness testified.
 Twenty-six payments were made in 1885, he said, and there was an over-expenditure that year of ST. 383 in that appropriation. There was no comment in the auditors re- ports, concerning the over-expendi- ture, he said.
 Attempts of Acorn to bring out that the auditS during the years were the same, but that the pay ments became larger with the pass age of time, were blocked by de- fense objections.
 Brown said that 28 payments to- talling $23, ,462 were made in 1886. and that 25 of the payments were entered on the city books after the checks had been cashed.
 In 1887, he said there were 36 payments for $30,436, but 34 of the payments were not entered until after being made. There was no comment on this by the auditors, he said. and the expenditure that year was $27,936.00.
 Turning attention then to pay ments to Simon J. Alderman, Of New Haven. another accountant, Brown testified that A payments were made to that accused between 1930 and 1887, representing city money totalling $24,06200:
 An important point brought out by Defense Attorney Crawford, rep resenting Alderman, was that all the information secured by Brown concerning payments to Alderman came from the books of the ac- cused. Alderman turned over his books for complete investigation, Brown said.
 The information on his schedule sheets showed that the source of in formation concerning Alderman was per Alderman"
 Payments to Simon J. Alderman ranged from $932 in 1886 to $8,295 in 1884, Brown said, and were charged to the sinking fund, departmental audits and welfare department au- dits.
 When Alcorn attempted to ques- ton Brown as to the authority" for the hiring of Alderman, defense ob- iections were sustained.
 A payment of $975 to Alderman, made January {. 1888 for services allegedly performed in 1887, could not be explained by Brown. When Alcorn asked the witness if Leary had ever paid Alderman personally. the witness said he did not know.
 Attorney Crawford volunteered the information that Alderman had been auditor for the Diamond Gin- ger Ale Company, Q Leary enter prike. from 1928.