The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-04-21
Evidence Presented
 In Trial Allowed
Continued from Page l,

For the week ending December 26, 1887, Coppeto received $135 and Santalucia $56.25; week ending De- cember 19, Coppeto $150O0; Santa lucia, $6250; week ending December 12, Coppeto $15000; Santalucia $6250; week ending, December g., Coppeto, $42.0O; Santalucia, $73.75; weeks ending November 21 and 28, Santalucia, $113.75.
 Judge Inglis, during the perusal of the payroll book denied motion of Attorney Patrick Healey that "in the interest of time saving" the witness not be required to go through every sheet. He pointed out that items pertaining to truck hire were grouped on one sheet for each week.
 Waste of Time! When Healey said it was waste of time," Alcorn countered that it was liar from a waste of time."
 Defense counsel contended during one phase of the questioning of ODonnell by Alcorn that the latter was going into contract hiring" of which the witness said he had no knowledge.
 Alcorn asked the witness if, aside from the books destroyed, there were any books kept in connection with contracts of trucks and equip- ment supplied the street depart ment.
 T don't know" he replied. He continued that he didn't see any such books, but that he didn't see all the books in the department.
 He added that he never worked on the payroll book which Alcorn placed before him.
 Do you know of any book in which records of the contractors services were kept?" asked Alcorn. Mo- was the reply.
 At the conclusion of the examina- ton of the payroll book, Alcorn pointed out that in November and December, 1887, the only two months O'Donnell contended truck pay- ments appeared on the payroll sheets, Coppeto received $477.O0 and Burns $368.75.
 Turning to O'Donnell he asked Do you know that checks of the city of Waterbury were issued to Santalucia in 1897 to an amount in excess of $1400OO.OO? Defense counsel objections were sustained before the witness could answer The witness, when asked if he knew whether the payroll book contained any reference to WPA truck hire, he answered that he did not know.
 Merely Reading
 Attorney Healey pointed out that ODonnell knew nothing about the keeping of the book, and that he was merely reading from it." A photograph would do as we'll" he submitted.
 Referring to vouchers showing payments of $550 to an unnamed contractor, under date of. December IT, 1887, Alcorn asked the witness ii he knew of any book in the street department in which the record oi payments was entered. When defense counsel objected Alcorn stated that he would "shoW that no books were kept to show Gin the city yards) the payments o1 tremendous sums of money, except what appeared on the pay roll sheets and the books he destroyed" | Atfnrnovyc a,1I rT1oI1., jected, stating that O'Donnell has testified that he knows nothing about the bookkeeping systems of the city. He continued that AL corn was going into the contract hiring system, of which the witness claims to know nothing. Who is the bookkeeper-any- body?" asked Alcorn.
 T don't know" replied O'Donnell
 Didn't have one did they?" he asked.
 "No," was the reply.
 On further questions along the same phase of the examination, AL corn drew several objections from the defense counsel. At one point l &AVCSAt4CJ OOAAA H. SoooAQy Why don't you take the witness stand, MT. Alcorn?' The remark was ignored.
 | Time Clerk
 On cross-examination by Attorney Healey, who is counsel for Supt. o1 Streets Thomas J. Fleming, de- fendant, O'Donnell admitted that he is only one of the time clerks in the city yards.
 He testified that the change in the system-allowing the placing o1 truck payments on the payrol sheets instead of the voucher sys- tenn was made at the request of tht truckers-in order that they might be paid weekly. Otherwise, he saic they had to await meetings of the board of finance for payment, anC the board met once in two weeks. nIVnDrT CnJTruT