The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-03-14

Mayors Counsel accounting outfit that did that?
 A. No, sir.
 o. Did you know that the Grif- fenhagen outfit came into the con- troller's office and set out new system of bookkeeping?
 A. Yes.
 A. Yes.
 o. And when did they do that?
 A. That was in the early part of 193O.
 Q. That is, while you were there. Wasn't 1t?
 A. Yes.
 o. The Griffenhagen outfit had been called in by the charter com. mission, had 1t not?
 A. They were there at the time and prior to 1880.
 @. There was a charter commis- sion appointed by the State Legis- lature in 1929, wasn't there?
 A. Yes.
 0. That was state board, wasn't 1t?
 A. Yes.
 @. And not a city board2
 A. That's correct.
 No Jurisdiction
 o. And over that body, the mu- nicipality of Waterbury had no jurisdiction. Did 1t?
 A Correct
 o. That charter commission ap- pointed by the State Legislature had for its purpose the revision of the charter of the city of Water bury. Didn't it?
 A. Yes.
 o. And the Griffenhagen outfit worked with the charter revision committee. Didn't it?
 A. They were there. o. They were brought in by the state? A. Brought in by the commission. c. In 1881 Waterbury had a new charter. Did 1t not?
 A. In 1931-yes.
 @. And that charter conveyed suggestions from the Griffenhagen outfit concerning bookkeeping methods in the controllers office. Did it not?
 A. I don't believe so.
 o. We'll, don't you know who made the suggestion of the change from the methods pursued by the administration in regard to the warrants payable register sheets?
 A. I imagine that you mean with regard to the signatures |?
 o. No. In regard to the way the of the sheets should be made out.
 A. The headings, I presume, was decided upon by the auditors.
 o. And the auditor used to 6e- sign the system was connected with the Griffenhagen? A. With the same firm.
 o. So that this new warrants payable register sheet that came into being in 1880 was in fact the suggestion of the Griffenhagen out fit?
 A. Yes.
 o. The Griffenhagen outfit sug- gested that symbols be used to de- signate certain funds. Did they not?
 A. Yes.
 o. How many symbols did the Griffenhagen outfit suggest should be used in the accountancy system of the controllers office of Water bury?
 Hundreds of Symbols
 A. They suggested symbols foi each item of appropriation.
 o. Can you approximate how many symbols were used on the warrants payable sheets?
 A.. Several hundred.
 o. Now, under the old system ol bookkeeping, when an item wal chargeable to a fund on sheets that went to the Board of Finance, the fund was designated by its name Was it not?
 A. That's correct.
 o. For instance, if certain item was chargeable to the street depart. ment, on the sheets of the Board oi Finance appeared Street Depart. ment. Did it not?
 A. That's correct.
 @. And when Griffenhagen peo- pie came in, they entirely changed that system. didn't they, and resort ed to symbols to designate the funds Did they not?
 A. To designate the fund ant appropriation.
 @. Yes. Well, now, can you tel just as soon as you look at a sym bol, what fund 1t designates without consulting key book?
 A. Yes.
 e. And you carry 200 ot those in your mind?
 A. They are similar. For example the appropriation for office sup lies would have same part of a symbol. It would be the same for all the departments and the only change would be in the department
 Q. (Atty. Murray asks for state: exhibit 65.) Will you be good enough to turn to the meeting Oi the Board of Finance of December 16, 1887?
 A. have 1t.
 e. Now, those are the sheets that were not signed by the Board of Finance. Aren't they?
 A. The sheets of Decemebr 1e are signed.