The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-18

were issued to Purdie. The two checks were issued December 20 1887, signed by Daniel J. Leary and endorsed by Purdie. The balance at the time of the sixth and last deposit was $2,335 .00, Brown said.
 Subsequently there were with drawals on three occasions, bring ing the account to $1,81525. That amount was withdrawn, closing the account January 19, 1888, when a treasurer's check was issued by and cashed by Olsen. Brown said.
 76th Day!
 Today's session of the trial, the 76th since November 29 when the impaneling of the jury was started, marked the eve of the first anni- versary of the issuance of a bench warrant for the arrest of 27 men on charges of conspiring to defraud the city of Waterbury.
 Before Warren M. Brown, states accountant, resumed the stand for the seventh day, Attorney Benja- min Slade, counsel for the Kingsley Company accountants on trial ad- dressed the court.
 He introduced Attorney Joseph Seamon of Perth Amboy, New Jer- sey, a member of the New York and New Jersey bars, as his associate counsel. The introduction was an in- dication that Seamon, 8 certified public accountant and registered municipal auditor, will cross-exam- inc MT. Brown on behalf of the de- fendants, at the conclusion of his direct testimony.
 Seamon is graduate of Fordham law school. An interesting angle of his career is that he was graduated from college before he completed his high school education. He obtained a high school diploma following one year of study, after being graduated from college.
 After MT. Seamon, who has been in court with Attorney Slade and other accountants representing the Kingsley Company since the start of Browns testimony Brown re- OllC WlUllSsoS OUdllu.
 Questioning concerned payments of city of Waterbury funds to the Connecticut Supply Company, as compared with amounts of deposits made in the name of the firm at the Waterbury Trust Company.
 $135,918 In 1886
 The company received $135 ,91851, during 1886, the witness said, &C., cording to his survey of deposit slips. City records were unavailable for any computation of the amount paid the firm during that year, he stated.
 One deposit slip dated March 3, 1886, represented 43 checks, he said, for total of $31, ,735.13 in the name of the Connecticut Supply Co. Un- der the same date, he said a credit clip had been placed to the company account in the amount of $21, ,735. .13, exactly $10,000 less than the original amount, the witness pointed out. The memorandum was in the hand writing of Carl D. Olsen, former vice-president and treasurer of the Waterbury Trust, Brown said.
 Ordinarily, such @ credit slip would represent the proceeds of a loan, Brown said, but the pink slip he referred to in this case did not represent any loan. "The difference of $l0,000 cannot be accounted for" he said.
 Brown added that many deposit slips in the name of the Connecticut Supply Company in 1886 were in the handwriting of Olsen.
 A credit memo for November 2, 1886 was displayed, indicating 8 group of 20 checks for an amount of $15,614.80. Out of the 20 checks, the witness said, all but seven were traced to the Connecticut Supply Company. The 13 cheeks were for payment of $11,283.25.
 On the same date, another pink slip memo credited the Connecticut Supply Company with $6,283.25, ex- actly $5,000 short of the amount equal to the 13 checks. The memo was written by Olsen, said Brown.
 Tracing the difference of 5000, Brown said treasurer's check had been issued by the Waterbury Trust November 2, the same date, in the name of the Connecticut Supply Go. by Olsen, and had been endorsed by Fruin.
 No Memorandum
 He testified that the ordinary pro. cedure would have been to charge the account of the firm for the $5,- 900, but that had not been done, so no complete memorandum was avail able.
 Twenty-two checks, for $l2,97S. SO, drawn on the city of Waterbury were cashed at the Waterbury Trust Co. in the name of the Connecticut Supply Go. November A of 1886, Brown said. On that same date, a deposit slip written ty Olsen showed an entry to the account of the com- pany, of $2,973.60. exactly $i0,O00 less than the group of 22 checks list- ed on the exchange proof" said Brown.
 Tracing that $10,000, said Brown, & treasurer's check was issued on the same date, the payee being the Connecticut Supply Co., the maker Carl D. Olsen and the endorser, Fruin. The cash was not deposited, said Brown, 'and all trace of it is thereafter lost"
 Francis Fruin is dead" inter- rupted Attorney Cassidy. How are we to meet the testimony as to where the cash went to?"
 His objection to the trend of tes- timony concerning Fruin was over- ruled, on that ground, however.
 The company's account was in- creased by $5,000 March 3l, 1886, with a deposit slip that did not in- dicate the source of the fund, the witness said.
 And on April IS, 1886, bills of $13,386.50 were deposited at the bank. on e slip in the writing of Olsen. said Brown.