The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-06-06

the bank in payment of a note.
 ESQ.," said Seaman. If you did no check the note records you did no make a complete survey"
 Brown said that his survey Ina, been complete, but he might hay, made some errors. But a man wll, doesn't make an error doesn't d, much work" he said.
 Daniel J. Leary, former controller whose illness caused delay of twt days last week, appeared in court t. day, apparently recovered.
 81st Session
 The 81st session of the trial, nov in the closing stages of the state case, opened promptly at 10 o'clocl today, with States Accountan Brown on the stand for his fourtl day of cross-examination by De fense Attorney Seaman. Brown frs took the stand Wednesday, May and has been on the stand 12 day since that time.
 The trial is now in its seventh month, having started November 2s 1888, involving g men on charge of conspiracy to defraud the cit, of Waterbury of more than a mil lion dollars.
 Special Prosecutor Hugh M. Al corn worked alone today, his twt assistants, Hugh M. Alcorn, Jr. ant Harold E. Mitchell being at the gen eral assembly, which is in the clos ing stages. Both were reappointet as assistant states attorneys b. the council of superior court judge in annual session yeterday.
 Brownsis expected to be dismissed from the witness stand by the enc of this week, and Special Prosecutor will then call one of his few re. maining witnesses. It has beer speculated that Alcorn will clost his case about a week after Browr is released.
 COmpress0rs Silenced
 The atmosphere in the courtroom was more pleasant than it ha: been on previous occasions. A COO breeze blew through the open win- dows, and there was no racket from the compressors in use on the de- molition of the old telephone build- ing. Judge Inglis has silenced the compressors for the trial.
 Opening his fourth day of cross- examination, Seaman questioned Brown about his consideration of q city payroll.
 "Is payroll a claim?" queried Seaman.
 T think I said a payroll is not a claim" replied Brown. Seaman abandoned that subject at that point.
 At Seaman's request, a court at tendant brought 8 journal voucher for 1881 to Brown, on the witness stand. Brown had testified that his checks of the city's finances agreed with the audits of the Kingsley Co with the exception of & sum oi $171, ,7O9.16, for 1881, which ht claimed was illegally transferred.
 Referring to the journal voucher Brown admitted that under date O December, 1881, it contained note O a transfer of $150, with the notation that it had been approved by Jame' P. Purcell. Purcell is now acting con troller, and in the early days of tht trial testified 19 days as a stat' witness.
 On the same trend of thought Seaman referred to the minutes O. the board of aldermen for Decem' Der 30, 1881, which showed that b. unanimous vote, the transfer hat been approved.
 Would be Noted
 Assume that you were engaged to make that audit" said Seaman "and your assistant examined tn would they note the trans fers on their working papers?"
 Brown replied that they would "Yes," he said, transfers of tha type would be noted" He added that he would examine all the work ing papers of his assistants, ant had done so even at the time h. had 12 assistants.
 Seaman pointed out that 38 journal vouchers had been mad that year and asked Brown if h. would examine them all. Browl replied that there was a difference Asked by Seaman if he would as sume that the Kingsley auditor had seen the votes of the transfer Brown replied that he would hav' the right to assume no such thing because no comment had been mad on 1t by the auditors. He admitted that they showed the figures, but T question the legality of it," h. continued.
 Frequently, Atty. Seaman pleaded with Brown to just answer the ques tions as they were asked. Browi replied to these that he wanted tn record to be straight.
 At that point Atty. Seaman asket Brown if he were acquainted witt committees of bar associations who's function it was to take accountant out of law work.
 When Brown nestled. Seaman explained that he referred to com mittees who worked to define tn functions of accountants so the, would not infringe on the work o lawyers.
 Brown then replied that he wa familiar with such bodies.
 That's Different
 Then Seaman asked Brown If l were not true that 1t was not al accountants function to attemp to interpret a charter of a statute
 That's not the case" replie' Brown hastily.
 But the court has ruled that yo' are not qualified to interpret tn charter" charged Seaman.
 That's a different thing" he piled Brown.
 Continuing then on the subject Q transfers made in 1881, Brown ad mitted that a journal vouche showed he listed a transfer of $2l. 709.16. He also testified that tn minutes of the meeting of the boar' of sinking fund commissioners Ii December, 1881. showed an approva of the transfer. No commissione voted against the transfer. although Commissioner John H. ooss was ab