The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-25

continued. 1
 Seaman attempted to draw out that such an accountant has duty to the public, in tha this statements are publicized for consumption o1 stockholders and creditors.
 Brown said that he considers his work as a public accountant just as privileged as an attorneys rela- tion to a client. T never discuss my assignments, he averred.
 Character Integrity
 Well" said Seaman, "the public may have an interest-for that req son you must be careful"
 I'm always careful" returned Browun ."I take int reconsideration my own character and integrity"
 The interest in the examina tior increased as Seaman asked Brown questions concerning payment or commissions for bond sales, and their subsequent charge to dppropri- ations.
 It was believed that Seaman was starting on an inquiry which would involve the payments made to John s. Johnston, a defendant, by the city over a period of eight years.
 Brown said that he did not recognize" any payment of con- mission on the sale of bonds, even though they might have been ap- proved by the legislature.
 But at that point, Seaman switched to a discussion of what he termed the "personalized system of bookkeeping" which he described as having been in existence more than 400 years-the original bookkeeping system.
 Single System
 Brown answered that he was not familiar with the system under that name. He said that he knew of the single entry system of book keeping, but he didn't know what system preceded it.
 Seaman offered the information that the personalized system which preceded the single entry system, was not used any lsore. Brown reiterated that he had never heard of the term, and added that he has not seen the single entry bookkeep- ing system in use of late years, al- though one city, whose books he worked on, used that system.
 He admitted that the single entry system should be repudiated. Hav- ing never heard of the personalized system he said, he felt that he was under handicap in discussing it.
 Another lengthy discussion de- veloped when Seaman questioned Brown about principles of account ing and their consideration by ac- countants. Brown admitted that accountants vary in their applica- tion of the principles.
 With the protracted questioning of Brown this morning concerning the principles of his trade and his experience, it was indicated that he would be on the stand for a lengthy period of time.
 Defense counsel spent yesterday in consultation over the methods to be employed in the cross-examin- ation of the man who on Tuesday charged tha tmore than $3,400,000 of city funds were spent irregularly during the eight years of the al- legged conspiracy for which g men are now on trial.
 More Witnesses
 The length of the croSS-examin- ation of Brown will be the nucleus for the time which must pass be- fore the state rests its case. It is reported that the state has less than half a dozen witnesses to call after Brown. and that the case will be rested within a week after Brown gets off the stand.
 Brown boasted that he could "spot" difference in the same signature on two checks. separated by 100 other checks.
 In answer to questions by Seaman, Brown admitted that he had never prepared city budget. and did not know what the term functional classification of costs" meant, in relation to modern accounting.
 Brown admitted that the ac. countants of the "old days" were considered "sleuths". He added, however, that that was before the installation of the income tax law, which has changed accountancy methods considerably since 1917.
 It was learned today that Judge Inglis will probably hold court un. til late tomorrow afternoon, then adjourn until Wednesday. inas- much as Decoration day, next Tues