The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-03

der by Judge Inglis.
 In answer to objections of Attor- ney Slade concerning the admis- sibility of the sheets, as segregated Special Prosecutor Alcorn replied that Brown, his accountant would connect them up.
 "So," remarked Slade, '"The cat is out of the bag" He demanded to know why Brown should be given the right to take the jurisdiction ot the court and jury and determine what parts of the exhibits were relevant, Judge Inglis refused to consider his arguments.
 Arguments
 Loud words were mterchanged by Alcorn, Shade and Crawford when Alcorn stated, after remarking that he has 192 ledger cards from the Citizens & Manufacturers National Bank, "Now I want to comply with the rules that all available records shall be here and this in view of the fact that they served subpoena on us, your honor please, to produce all records, and we have them here
 "That is not the rule of law" re- turned Slade. "The rule is to pro- duce all records that are pertinent not all records to be had"
 "Well, have them and here they are," said Alcorn.
 Attorney George Crawford ob- jected to that statement and hotly argued with Alcorn over it, but Judge Inglis allowed it to stand.
 With the arguments concluded, Special Prosecutor Alcorn intimated that he would call Carl T. Heebner, assistant cashier at the Citizens 6 Manufacturers National Bank. But Attorney Cassidy asked for 8 recess and it was granted.
 Following the recess, Heebner took the stand on call of Alcorl, who in- dicated that he intended to intro duce various records of the bank by having them identified by the witt ness.
 Heebner, who has been assistant cashier since 1892, said that the &C., tive commercial account of the city has been kept at the Citizens Bank since 1881, which was the year the Merchants Trust failed, he said.
 Identifies Records
 He identified as records of his bank, 15 sheets handed him by AL corn. Individual items and checks coming to the Citizens Bank from correspondent banks and local banks would be contained on the sheets, Heebner said.
 When defense counsel objected to the sheets, Alcorn said that he off, fered them to show payments made by the city. The sheets were neces- sary to show the payments, he said, because the cancelled checks are missing.
 Alcorn continued that the records would show that checks went through the Waterbury Trust Con- pany-city checks, for payment of city funds.
 Heebner stated that the sheets would show all city checks paid dur ing the period May II, 1892 to December 31, 1892.
 Defense counsel argued that they were irrelevant and should not be admitted. When it developed that some portions of the sheet may not be relevant, Judge Inglis suggested that a check mark be placed on the relevant portions.
 Attorney Crawford rose to deliver criticism to the state staff, stat ing that after having the records 12 to Is months they should be in a position to present them properly.
 Attorney Patrick Healey said that ''in the interest of fair play" the defense should be given the benefit of having the sheets segregated. He said that otherwise the defense would be placed in the position of looking for needle in a haystack."
 Sheets Admitted
 When Alcorn again stated that Brown would be the connecting link, Slade shouted that the state was going to ask Brown for reductions" and that cross examination on such testimony would be extremely diffi- cult. Judge Inglis overruled the ob- jections and admitted the IS sheets. Heebner thereupon testified that the