The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-07-13

the stand early this morning. He was questioned by Attorney Slade as follows:
 e. From your knowledge that you had of him, going back to your ex- perience with him in the Studdard Company and down to later years, did you repose confidence in MT. Borgnaes?
 A. Absolutely.
 c. After the formation of George H. Kingsley Company did you meet MT. Hayes.
 A. Yes.
 @. Did you meet him before the formation of Kingsley 6s Company?
 A. The first time I met MT. Hayes or MT. Leary was March 20, 1883. The first time I was ever in the city of Waterbury in my life was on March 20, 1888.
 @. Now, in 1883, you say you met Mayor Hayes and MT. Leary?
 A. That's right.
 Started in 1892
 c. will you kindly tell his honor and the jury in your own way what took place at the time you first met those gentlemen?
 A. We'll, in March 1883, we were to begin the 1892 audit. Naturally, 1t was the first audit under Kings ley & Company of the city of Wa terbury. MT. Meaney and I went over the details of the work. We came up and had a conference with Mayor Hayes and MT. Leary at which time we pointed out that the audit didn't include verification of the payroll and we thought 1t should be done because 1t accounts as an insurance preventing the padding of the payroll. The mayor turned to Mir. Leary and said: What do you think? Is there any reason why it should not be done?" and Mir. Leary said no and Mayor Hayes said "All right. I want it done from now on. J I told him 1t was too late to make payroll audit in order to incorporate 1t in the 1892 report, but all we could do was to go back to the 1892 pay roll, take checks, check them back against the payroll register, and check 1t to satisfy ourselves of the reasonable accuracy of the payroll But in the future, my recommenda- tions were that we should come ur once or twice @ year, unknown to the paymaster, but at & time the pay checks were made, check them back against their register and let oui men pay off the employees; and ir that way, as our men concluded theil work, if there were any pay cheeks not called for, one of our men woulc follow 1t up to make sure that the pay roll was proper and correct And the mayor thought-in fact, in structed us to see that that worl was done from now on. And tha was our conversation, because ir making pay roll audit of that type If any one knows when we would come up, 1t would beat our purpose and so when we would come up, oli operations would be unknown t. everybody, including the mayor an, controller; and so from then or we would pick selected dates t. come up and select the men [, check the payroll and to pay of That was our conversation that day and at the same time we pointed out to the mayor that the audit ap propriation was $2,500 and tolt him we would have to do the audi on 6 day-to-day basis, in order to bt fair to the city. He asked us how much more 1t would require, and averaged that 1t might cost abou $1, 1000 or whereabouts more.
 Borgnaes in Charge
 c. When you suggested in that conversation about getting $1,00t more, what was said?
 A. He said 1t would be quite agreeable.
 c. Who was in charge, if yo, know, for the audit for 1892? A. MT. BorgnaeS was in charge
 c. When did you next see tn, mayor? A. The next time I saw the may. or was in the fall of 1883, at which time the question of the installation of system in the tax collectors of' flee was discussed.
 c. Will you please give your bes recollection of what was said on tha subject and who was there at tn, time the conversation took placer A. When you first asked mt when I saw the mayor and stated November 1, 1883, that's correct, bu in August 1883, the office was in re. ceipt of a letter from MT. Leary au. thorizing us to go ahead and mak an audit of the tax lists of 1929. tht tax between that period of Marci and November 1.
 c. Was this letter received by yo, after the talk you had with tn mayor? A, No, we have a summer home