|
With the Trial.-The Result of the Trial. AT the close of Mr. Clinton's address the Court ad- journed until Monday, the 4th of March, at which time the trial proceeded, and was continued from day to day until and including Friday, the 8th of March, when it was adjourned until the following Monday. Richard A. Storrs was the first witness called for the prosecution. He testified that he was an assistant in the Comptroller's office, and had been there since the year 1857. He stated that he caused a search to be made in the Comptroller's office, and the paper he had in his hand was given to him the preceding summer by Mr. Connolly, who was then Comptroller. He testified that the paper was in the handwriting of Mayor Hall; and that the signatures thereto were those of Mayor Hall, Mr. Tweed, Commissioner of Public Works, and Comptroller Connolly. The paper was read in evidence, and was as follows : "COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE,
5th
May, 1870.
"The undersigned meet as a Commission
under and by
virtue of section 4, chapter 382, of the laws of 1870. On motion of the Mayor it is `Resolved, That the County Au- ditor collect from the appropriate committees of the Board of Supervisors all bills and liabilities against the county in- curred prior to April 26, 1870, and the amounts now due thereon, and that the evidence of the same be the authori- zation of the same, by the said board or its appropriate committees, on the certificate of the clerk or president, and that thereupon the said County Auditor annex the voucher and the appropriate blanks for our signature, and action, as directed by the section aforesaid, and payment. "A. OAKEY HALL, Mayor. "WILLIAM M. TWEED, Present President Board of Supervisors. "RICHARD B. CONNOLLY, Comptroller." The witness testified that he had no knowledge of any meeting of the commission referred to in this paper or of the gentlemen composing it. Upon being asked whether he knew of any record in the Comptroller's office having reference to the meetings or business of this commission, the witness stated that he knew of a package of papers representing the county liabilities, which were kept in the County Auditor's office; and that about the 11th of September, 1870, these papers were stolen, and have not since been recovered. He at once apprised the Comptroller of the theft, and they went to the desk where the papers were kept. He said "The pigeon-holes where those vouchers were kept were empty; the lock had been forced and a portion of the glass was broken." The vouchers relating to the Board of Audit were stolen. Those vouchers included the claims of A. J. Garvey. The witness knew of the ex- istence of these vouchers of claims of A. J. Garvey be- fore the robbery. Subsequent to the robbery he knew of no such vouchers, though he had made a search. He stated that he was able to distinguish the class of claims that passed through the Board of Audit and other coun- ty claims in general that were presented. The witness stated the routine in the Comptroller's office in respect to the auditing and payment of claims for county lia- bilities. Stephen C. Lynes was the next witness called for the prosecution. He testified that he was recently the county book-keeper in the office of the Comptroller; that he was engaged there from 1858 to 1871; that he was appointed County Auditor by the Comptroller in May, 1870, and remained in that position until September, 1871. The witness stated the routine business in the Comptroller's office with respect to claims presented to the Board of Audit, consisting of Messrs. Hall, Tweed, and Connolly. He said when bills were presented, Tweed's name, as chairman, was written across the page in his own hand- writing. The witness testified to the robbery of the vouchers in September, 1871. William S. Copeland was next called by the prosecu- tion. He stated that he was employed in the Comp- troller's office in January, 18 70, and remained there until March, 1871. He was engaged in the county bureau to assist Mr. Lynes, the book-keeper. The prosecution offered in evidence the following warrant
Countersigned. { RICHARD B. CONNOLLY, Comptroller. J. B. YOUNG, Clerk Board of Supervisors. After protracted argument on the part of the defence the Court admitted this warrant in evidence. It was not known to the defendant, or any of the Tweed Ring, that Andrew J. Garvey, who was deeply implicated in the Ring frauds, was ready to turn State's evidence. It was believed that he was in Europe, whith- er he had fled soon after the arrest and prosecution of those concerned in the Ring frauds commenced. He had been in New York City a considerable time, ready to testify when wanted. On Thursday afternoon, the prosecution being ready for his testimony, determined to put him on the stand. In what way to introduce him into court, so as to avoid wild excitement and a tumult- uous crowd, was a subject for consideration. Mr. Clin- ton planned the mode of doing it. It was arranged that Garvey should quietly attend in the clerk's office with- out removing the disguise which he wore; and, at the conclusion of Mr. Copeland's evidence (who testified in respect to routine matters in the Comptroller's office, entirely uninteresting, during which most of the audi- ence left), upon being called as a witness, he should re- move his disguise, walk into the court-room, and take his place on the witness-stand. This programme was carried out. Had Garvey risen from the dead, and ap- peared in his grave-clothes, he could not have carried greater consternation into the ranks of the defence. The effect upon defendant's different Counsel was peculiar and extraordinary. One looked as though he would die in an apoplectic fit; another became livid, etc. The whole scene was extraordinary. The Clerk of the Court happened to be out, so that Judge Daly had to adminis- ter the oath to the witness. He attempted it and stum- bled, and failed to get it right ; he started afresh and stumbled again; his excitement and lack of self-posses- sion were remarkable. Finally, he succeeded in getting the form of the oath correct, and the witness was duly sworn. Poor Garvey in the meantime sat perched up in the witness-chair, facing his old comrades, tremulous with excitement, evidently making desperate efforts to maintain his self-possession. Finally, the suspense ended, and the direct-examination of the witness by Mr. Tremain began. The court-room, which was almost empty when Garvey entered, by this tirne was filled and crowded to overflowing, the news having circulated with the speed of lightning through the City Hall and its vicinity that "Garvey had come." The following account of the scene appeared in the New York Tribune of March 8, 1872: Mayor Hall.-A Dramatic Scene.-The Mayor Livid with Rage, or Fright.-The Counsel for the Defence Thrown into a State of Con- sternation.-Garvey to Confess the Whole Conspiracy. -Ingersoll also Ready to Turn Informer. Excitement in the City and at the Clubs. "The defection of Connolly, the accession of Green to the Comptrollership, the overwhelming defeat of Tammany at the polls, the arrest of Tweed, and the indictment of Hall and Sweeny * * * were all exciting events in the great drama of the Ring's downfall ; but no one of these incidents was so startling as the occurrence of yesterday, when, com- ing from the clerk's apartment, in which he had been con- cealed, as from a tomb in which he had been interred, An- drew J. Garvey, at the Attorney-General's call, walked into the court-room and took the witness stand, to testify against Mayor Hall. Not merely were the people in the court-room surprised, and the accused and his Counsel amazed at the apparition of the returned plasterer, but consternation fell upon the Ring and its adherents; and the whole city was convulsed with the varied emotions naturally created by the news that one of the conspirators had returned to con- vict the others. No more dramatic incident ever occurred in a New York court-room. If Judge Daly had read his own death-warrant from the bench, a more profound sensation of astonishment could not have agitated the court-room than when Garvey took the witness-stand. "The proceedings of the day, up to the moment he was called, had been uninteresting and tiresome to an unusual degree. The audience had grown so small that it was no longer difficult, as in former days, for the reporters and Counsel to force their passage into the space set apart for them. The reporters had grown careless, and even the pres- ence of Copeland, the witness upon whose affidavit the ac- tion against the Mayor and others was largely based, did not relieve the tedium of the trial, for the reason that all the morning had been taken up with never-ceasing objec- tions and exhaustive arguments. The attack by the prose- cution in the production of the testimony of Copeland was confidently sustained by the defence, who doubtless con- sidered that half the battle had been fought when this was in, but they had no conception of the unexpected shot that was yet in reserve to disconcert them. After the recess, and at the conclusion of the argument, Mr. Copeland was recalled for a moment, but before he gave any testimony the prosecution seemed to change purpose, and the witness was dismissed. "A short whispered consultation was held between the Counsel for the people, not a word of which could be gath- ered or overheard. But it resulted in Mr. Peckham's calling out in a loud voice the name `Andrew J. Garvey.' "It was instantly concluded by the crowd that the acting Attorney-General had made an error, a mere slip of the tongue, and a slight laugh, half scornful, half incredulous, followed. But when the lawyer turned and fixed his eye upon the closed door which leads to the Judge's private room, all turned and gazed inquiringly in the same direc- tion, while smiles expressed the incredulity of the crowd. A Court official suddenly darted into the private room, and while the name of Garvey sounded a second time on Mr. Peckham's lips, the veritable Andy Garvey walked rapidly through the door, up the steps leading to the bench, disap- pearing for a moment behind the broad sounding-board in the rear of the Judge's seat, reappeared beside the witness- stand, and grasped the Bible as he waited with head un- covered to receive the oath. "The effect of this coup on the part of the prosecution may be imagined, it cannot be described. A buzz of aston- ishment filled the room. Many persons involuntarily rose in their seats and stared at the new-comer as if he were a ghost come from the grave to fright them. Those who were not familiar with his features turned inquiringly to others, some of whom said, `It is his brother.' A number of gentlemen prominent in matters pertaining to the City Hall and new Court-house were sitting inside the bar and standing about the clerk's desk, and they were as greatly surprised as others. A large number of prominent law- yers were also present, interested spectators of the exciting scene. The surprise was complete and undoubted, and dur- ing the moment that Garvey stood quietly waiting for the oath, the room was a Babel of whispers. "The faces of the different Counsel were studies of char- acter never to be forgotten. Mr. Peckham's imperturbable features betrayed no tokens of the satisfaction he must have felt at the success of his difficult task. Mr. Tremain and Mr. Clinton made no efforts to hide their complacency, and evidently enjoyed the discomfiture which this thunder-bolt out of a clear sky had occasioned. The faces of the half- dozen Counsel grouped about the Mayor were even more instructive, and exhibited a greater variety of expression. Ira Shafer and Mr. Smith were decidedly demoralized, and Showed it. Mr. Burrill stepped about with nervous quick- ness, and laughed contemptuously, but with a forced and hollow laugh. Mr. Stoughton, dignified and imposing, ap- peared indignant, and like a man who, driven into a corner, is bound to fight the harder; while Mr. Vanderpoel simply smiled. "As to Mayor Hall, his countenance, while tolerably com- posed, nevertheless bore a look of chagrin and serious disap- pointment, and he was livid--with rage or fear. The blow, in its very unexpectedness, was hard to bear, and the ac- cused gathered his defenders about him at once in earnest conference. It was evident that none of them had looked for evidence of this sort to prove the existence of the lost voucher, and to establish, perhaps, even more. "Meanwhile the. news spread rapidly that `Garvey was on the stand'; the room quickly filled, and numbers stood outside the doors in vain endeavors to gain entrance and a sight of the almost mythological personage, whose name had been in everybody's mouth scarcely less than Tweed's. As Garvey stood at the Judge's left hand, in full view of the whole Court, those who saw him before his disappearance from New York imagined his hair grayer and his features sharper than usual, as though the recollections of crime and the vain effort to fly from conscience as from justice had changed his appearance, manner, and nature alike. His manner certainly was agitated and his motions nervous and frightened. His voice slightly quivered as he replied to the questions of Mr. Tremain, and he was painfully polite, even to servility, as guilty men in such embarrassing positions are apt to be. "Whatever hope the defence may have clung to at the commencement of the testimony seemed to have been dis- sipated at the appearance of this new witness, whom all had supposed out of the country. The dangerous nature of the testimony which he might give was instantly suggested by the first questions of the Counsel, Mr. Tremain, who con- ducted the examination ; and it was not many minutes be- fore the defence rallied and came forward with their objec- tions and arguments. It was hardly in the nature of men constituted as the Counsel for the defence to rest long from the fight, and there consequently followed a wordy warfare of the most remarkable and exciting character." The following account of the scene was given by the New York World of March 8, 1872 "The reform movement has been noted for dramatic episodes, but nothing of the kind that has yet taken place can compare with the scene in the Court of Common Pleas yesterday, when the long-absent and oft-indicted Andy Garvey appeared in propria persona before the assembled. audience. Up to the middle of the forenoon the trial has dragged its slow length along with tedious lack of interest, and the numerous and learned Counsel on either side wasted their strength and consumed the hours in legal fence and skilful subtleties, calculated rather to show their knowledge of technicalities than to help onward the proceedings. A number of additional documents were offered in evidence, and this led to long wrangles as to their admissibility. "Suddenly, at ten minutes to three o'clock, the crier, at a hint from the Counsel for the prosecution, startled every one present by calling out the name of Andrew J. Garvey, who was summoned to appear as a witness. At once all other sounds subsided, and there was a hush of expectation throughout the vast crowd present. Every eye was strained and every neck stretched, though no one for a moment im- agined that any living person would respond to the dis- cordant summons. But to the amazement of every one, some one did appear. The large door leading into the clerk's private room at one side turned on its hinges, and through it walked with rapid but bold tread no less a person than Andy Garvey himself, who passed through the room with- out hesitation and took his seat at the witness stand at the left hand of the Judge. The effect of his appearance was like that of a thunder-clap out of a cloudless sky. An elec- tric thrill ran through the crowd, and a murmur of sur- prise passed from mouth to mouth. The Counsel for the prosecution were elated, while their opponents were dum- founded, and consulted with their heads close together. The only man in the room who retained his ordinary com- posure was the defendant himself. Mr. Hall was engaged in writing when Garvey entered ; he looked up a moment and then continued the work in hand without being in the least disturbed by the sudden and rather dramatic appear- ance of the man upon whose testimony Counsel for. the prosecution were relying for the ultimate triumph of their cause." After answering a few preliminary questions, Garvey was shown a warrant for the payment of money which had previously been put in evidence. He testified that his name written on the back of it was his signature; and that at the time he received the warrant there were other papers with it. The following is an extract from his evidence given in the report of the proceedings in the New York Tribune, March 8, 1872: "Question. 'These papers in connection with this account and the warrant, did they come together?' "Answer. `The papers, I believe, belonged to the bill, and, with the warrant, were all pinned together; the warrant was pinned on, and I think the others were mucilaged together.' "Q. `The,warrant was separated and you got it?' "A. 'Yes, sir.' "Q. `And you left the balance of the papers with Wood- ward ?' "A. `Yes, Sir.' "Q. `Was this account a just and honest account ?' "Instantly Mr. Burrill for the defence was on his feet, and the fight of the defence was resumed. "Mr. Burrill. `We object. What is the object of that ?' "Mr. Tremain. `Perhaps I ought, out of frankness to the gentlemen on the other side, to state the object of the question. What I want to show by this question is, that this entire account, with the exception of perhaps thirty-five per cent. of it, was wholly fictitious, and had no foundation whatever in justice, in honesty; and in fact."' Mr. Stoughton, on behalf of the defence, entered into an argument against the admissibility of this question which occupied all the rest of the day, and a large part of the following day (Friday). Without hearing any argument on behalf of the prosecution, Judge Daly de- cided that the question was admissible. The Tribune report (March 9, 1872), after giving the argument of Mr. Stoughton, proceeds as follows : "Judge Daly, at the conclusion of Mr. Stoughton's re- marks, said he should rule for the present that the witness might be asked all that he knows respecting this claim--on what it is founded, its presentation, and its history down to the time of its payment. He did not think it proper to give his reasons for such ruling then, but would decide for the present in that way. Mr. Smith desired the Court to note their exception, and the prosecution then called A. J. Gar- vey again to the stand. * * * "Question. `How was it made up--on what foundation, if any, was it made up?' "Answer. `In the latter part of April Woodward was Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, and on the 25th of April, 1870, James W. Ingersoll stated--' "Mr. Smith. `One moment, stop there.' "Judge Daly. 'You cannot do what ?' "Witness. `I don't know how I can answer that question without telling what Ingersoll stated.' "Mr. Tremaine. `In consequence of what they said, you did something ?' "Mr. Stoughton. `Or after what they said, rather.' "Witness. `I had finished all the plastering in the Court- house from May, 1869, up to the present moment--all that is done.' "Q. 'You mean up to the time of this conversation ? I want to confine you to the time before this account was presented, in June, 1870. Go on and state what was done before that time when this account was presented.' "A. `It was necessary for me to finish the plastering, la- bor, and materials, and finish the repairs and alterations of the Court-house for $110,900.' "Q. `At what time ?' "A. `The 20th of April, 1870. I went to get that amount which was actually due for work done and in progress at that moment: On account of buildings .....................$78,760 Armories and drill rooms . . . . . . . . . . 75,000 That was money that I wanted to pay me for labor and materials and expenses, and allow me my profits; besides, there were due to me unpaid by outside parties $126,000 that I was expecting to cover up in my bills ; there was $50,000 that was cashed to Mr. Tweed to Albany for the Legislature.' "Mr. Burrill. `We object.' "Mr. Garvey said he would have to go into that question in order to fix the amount of this one bill. "Mr. Burrill. `Can't he state how much is the over- charge in this bill ?' "Mr. Tremaine. `This bill is part and parcel of the sys- tem of bills, all introduced under one arrangement, and it is utterly impossible to take a single bill and separate it from its compeers.' "Judge Daly (to Mr. Garvey). `Is that so ?' "Mr. Garvey. `It is, to separate, to a certain extent ; this arrangement of ours was nearly all concocted and made up before I made out my bills at all.' * * * * * * * "Q. 'Explain the nature of this bill as far as you can without entering into the other matters ?' "A. `Well, the amount I claimed for work on the Court- house, in the armory buildings and drill-rooms was two hundred and sixty-four thousand six hundred and sixty dol- lars ($264,660), work done and in progress; and there was due me for other purposes that I was expected to square in my bills, one hundred and twenty-six thousand dollars ($126,000); Then I added five thousand dollars ($5000) for myself for expenses of the full---political expenses-my own assessments.' "Mr. Burrill interrupted the witness. "Mr. Clinton. `Objections must be addressed to the Court and not to the witness.' "Witness. ` T'hat was the money I expected to get paid at the bank.' "Mr. Burrill. 'The witness does not seem to follow your Honor's instructions.' "Mr. Tremain. 'Yes, he does.' "Mr.Burrill. 'He seems rather willing to indulge in expressions that have nothing to do with the case. All we ask is that in eliciting evidence which might be material, the Court does not allow evidence to be introduced of other bills which are not the subject of this indictment, and of bills other than this one now before the Court.' "Judge Daly. `Mr. Garvey, a proper inquiry can be made into this bill for $41,000 as to how it originated. You can make an explanation of that without any further mat- ter, except so far as it is essential to explain that. Keep as much as possible out of any other matter.' "Mr. Burrill. `Allow me a suggestion. He has got the bill of $41,000 ; can't he state how much of that bill is hon- est or not ? "Judge Daly. `I can only state the limit of the inquiry.' "Q. ` Now follow the suggestion of the Court, Mr. Gar- vey.' "A. `I had $395,660 I claimed to be paid, and I made up my bills with a view--' "Mr. Durrill. `We object to any other bills.' "Witness. `I made out this bill for forty-one thousand dollars ($41,000) with a view of paying a certain propor- tion ; I received thirty :five per cent. of the bill; the interest had nothing to do with it ; I took the net bill and twenty- five per cent. of that in payment of myself and my work ; I actually received a few hundred dollars more than my es- timate--$395,660. I received, I think, three hundred and ninety-seven thousand dollars ($397,000); the accounts were made out on that basis, so that I got back my money and paid for the bills I had advanced ; I received but thirty five per cent. of the net bill without the interest.' "Q. `And this was one of the bills thus made out?' "A. `That is a pretty fair copy of that bill.' * * * * * * * "There was $50,000 in cash, said to be for matters in con- nection with the legislature, and which was taken to Albany to Mr. William M. Tweed by my brother; there was $60,000 for working expenses in Greenwich, Connecticut, in 1869 and 1870, for William M. Tweed, work by his order at Coscob ; two amounts, $60,000, for a friend; $13,000 for work done in Norwalk for Mr. Woodward; $3000 for plastering two houses for ---- in Fifty-fifth Street; I gave Mr. ----- a receipt for it in the room down-stairs, but I never presented him a bill; $5000 fbr myself ; I thus anticipated my ex- penses for the fall campaign.' "Q. `Your own assessment?' "A. `Yes.' "Q. ` There were two houses for ----- , one for Tweed, and one for a friend ?' "A. `Yes, sir.' * * * * * * * "Q. `Now, then, take this particular account, and give a history of it from the time you presented it until you finally received the warrant. State all you know about it, and what took place in its passage.' "A. `As near as I can judge, that account was ren- dered--' "Mr: Burrill objected, as witness was not shown to speak positively of this particular account. "Mr. Tremain. `Is that any reason why the whole ques- tion should not be answered ?' "Judge Daly. `His answer must be given, and you can cross-examine upon it.' "Mr. Tremain. `There must be some limit to these ob- jections.' "Mr. Durrill. `I insist we ought to be allowed to object to every question.' "Judge Daly. `Mr. Garvey, speak, as far as you can, of everything you know.' "Question repeated. "A. ` I think about the latter part of May, with probably three other bills--' "Mr. Stoughton. `Speak of this bill.' "Judge Daly. `You have no right to interrupt the wit- ness.' "Mr. Stoughton. `You confine him to answer in respect to this bill--if I am right in saying that I had a right to stop him when he undertook to speak about other bills.' "Judge Daly. `He has not spoken of this except in con- nection with other bills.' "Mr. Stoughton. `He can't speak of this bill without speaking of other bills.' "Witness. `I did not put this bill in alone.' "Question repeated. "A. `I gave a bill, I think, with three others--' "Mr. Burrill. `The witness ought to be restrained within proper limits.' "Judge Daly. `Mr. Garvey, as far as you can, state what you did in reference to this particular bill.' "Q. `What did you do in reference to this particular bill ?' "A. `I gave it, with three others, to Mr. Woodward, in the office of the Board of Supervisors, and he looked at them.' "Mr. Burrill. `The witness has said that he has no recol- lection of this particular bill.' "Mr. Tremain. `He did not.' "Mr. Burrill. `He did.' "Mr. Tremain. (to the witness). `Go on, sir.' "Witness. `He took them, and just after glancing at them he took them over to Mr. Watson's office.' "Q. `Where was he?' "A. `In the Supervisors' office.' "Q. `Did he have a particular desk there ?' "A. `He took it over there.' "Mr. Stoughton. `Did you go with him?' "A. `Yes, I did.' "Mr. Tremain. `I submit that these continued interrup- tions are improper.' "Witness. `He took them over to Watson's office and left them there.' "Q. ` Watson was the Auditor ?' "A. `Yes, sir.' "Q. `How long had he acted as such ?' "A. `I could not tell you that--a great many years.' "Q. `Where was his office?' "A. `In the Comptroller's office, adjoining Mr. Connolly's room.' "Q. `Did the Auditor have his office there?' "A. `Yes, Sir. He had an office partitioned off there, with a nice walnut partition.' "Q. `You say you went there with him. What did he do with the accounts ?' "A. `He just handed them to Watson.' "Q. `What was the next thing you know of them ?' "A. `After June he found me and took the into a room down-stairs.' "Q. `State what was done between you and him.' "A. `We. went into the room, closed the door after us, went over into a private corner, and I gave him the check.' * * * * * * * "Witness. `I gave him a check for $110,135.13.' "Q. `To whom?' "A. `To Woodward ; my own check on the Broadway Bank.' "Q. ` Was that check paid at the bank?' "A. `Yes, Sir. I went over there and deposited the war- rants.' "Q. `Your bank-book has been written up since then ?' "A. `Yes, sir.' "Q. `Including that check?' "A. `Yes, sir.' "Mr. Tremain. ` Now, I will bring up the other question that I waived at the time.' "Mr. Burrill. `I ask your honor to strike out all that this witness has said in his last answers, as to the giving of the check to Woodward.' "Judge Daly. `I will note your exception to the testi- mony ; what is the particular portion you wish to strike out ?' "Mr. Burrill. `My motion is to strike out everything on the subject of giving Woodward the check, because after the warrant was signed it was not connected with anything in this case.' "Judge Daly (to Mr. Tremain). `What do you propose to show with regard to the evidence after the Mayor had signed the warrant ?' "Mr. Tremain. `I had hoped at this stage of the case that I should not be required to answer that question, but that the evidence would be received. I understand that the testimony, pure and simple, is evidence in this case, whether it appear for or against the prosecution, on the principle that whatever formed part of the res gesta of the case was admissible, and that the Court had ruled that from the time the accused was prosecuted until the warrant should be re- ceived, all matters relating to it should be given in evidence. Now if the person who had this warrant refused to deliver it until the witness gave him $100,000, this is connected with the delivery of the warrant prior to its payment, which is alleged in the indictment as one of the statements in the indictment pointing out the modus operandi by which this warrant was signed.' "Judge Daly. `I propose to admit evidence down to the time of the delivery of the warrant and to exclude all from the time of the Mayor's final act, which was signing the warrant, unless that question has some connection with something else, to which I do not, at present, see its perti- nency.' "Mr. Tremain. `I will waive the question and proceed to offer in evidence his account (the bill of Garvey), as I wish to ask a few questions relating to it.' "Mr. Tremain then offered in evidence the account of Mr. Garvey, the certificate of audit, the Comptroller's order on the Auditor to draw the warrant, and the receipt for the warrant." Garvey testified that he made no affidavit in respect to the correctness of his claim. Garvey further testified as follows "Q. Before you presented the account in question, did you receive from Woodward a memorandum in writing, giv- ing you the subject-matter of the account, together with the amount of it and its date?' " A. `Yes, sir ; on a piece of paper.' * * * * * * * "Q `Did you receive these memoranda from Woodward, as to the amount of the account, its date, and the substance of it ?' "A. `I made the bills out in accordance with the mem- oranda given me by Woodward under the heading and the dates.' "Q. `He gave you also a heading?' "A. `The title of the account ; he said : "Make your bills for such an account on the Court-house dated prior "--such a date.' "Mr. Burrill. `I understand you to say you made out the bill as you were told ?' "A. ` Yes, sir.' "Mr. Tremain. `Is there any portion of this account that you can point out that you can identify as being embraced in the memoranda given you by Woodward--whether it was printed ?' "A. `Yes, sir; the sum total.' "Q. `What else?' "A. `The designation of the bill; the cost against the Court-house.' "Q. `And the date? "A. `That is approximating; he said prior--such a date."' The above is the substance of the testimony given by Garvey on Thursday and Friday, at the close of which last-mentioned day the Court adjourned until Monday morning, March 11th, at which time the Court convened to proceed with the trial. Great was the surprise of all present when, by the direction of Judge Daly, the Clerk of the Court read the following certificate in respect to Mr. Clark, the foreman of the jury : " JUDGE DALY: "DEAR SIR,-I am attending Mr. Matthias Clark, of No. 525 Greenwich Street, who has been suffering from nervous prostration since Friday last, and will be unable to do duty as juror for several days to come. Mr. Clark suffered from an attack of paralysis about two years ago, and as I find that a continuance of this kind of service may induce a sec- ond attack, I would earnestly recommend that he be entirely relieved. "Respectfully, J. W. WRIGHT, M.D., "March 11, 1872." "No. 8 Charlton Street. The Court adjourned the trial until the following Fri- day, thinking it was barely possible that Mr. Clark by that time might be in a condition to resume his duties as a juror. On the previous Thursday, as soon as Gar- vey had answered a few preliminary questions upon the witness stand, Counsel for the defence began to make and argue at great length objections to questions put to the witness. This course was pursued by Counsel for the defence down to the time of adjournment of the Court on Friday afternoon. These arguments, which should have taken but a few minutes, occupied hours. When Counsel for the prosecution answered them, they required but a few minutes. Still the Counsel for the defence continued to make objections and occupied the greater part of the time of the Court in arguing them. It seemed to be their idea to block the proceedings of the Court with talk--endless talk. Had Mr. Clinton known that Mr. Clark had previously been afflicted with a stroke of paralysis, he would not have permitted him to go on the jury, even though it had been necessary to challenge him peremptorily. Mr. Clark had not vitality sufficient to withstand the effect of the talk of Coun- sel for defence. It rasped his nerves, and speedily un- dermined his vitality. He could sleep but little nights. The talk of the defendant's Counsel haunted him; when asleep he repeated more or less of it. On Tuesday, the 12th of March, he died. Of course, the death of the juror Clark broke up the trial, and the remaining eleven jurors were discharged. In respect to the criminal trials against those who were members of, or affiliated with, the Tweed Ring, it was understood that Mr. Clinton should take charge of empanelling the juries, of investigating their antecedents and associations, and ascertaining their qualifications and fitness to serve, as he, alone of the Counsel for the prosecution had the requisite knowledge of political af- fairs in the City of New York to enable him to perform that duty satisfactorily. After the trial of Mayor Hall ended as above stated, a new indictment was found by the Grand Jury against him and Tweed and Comptroller Connolly, charging them with a large number of offences in failing, as members of the Board of Audit, properly to audit claims. This was known as the "Omnibus" in- dictment. Of course this indictment superseded the for- mer one against Mayor Hall. Afterwards and on the 23d day of October, 1872, Mr. Clinton was in Court to hear a decision upon a motion made on behalf of Tweed to reduce his bail. Mayor Hall was present and interposed his plea of "Not Guilty" to the new indictment; and at the time of doing so made a little speech, avowing his readiness to go to trial. No arrangements had been made to commence his trial; it had not been set down for any particular time. No prep- aration had been made in the way of examining the list of jurors or investigating as to their antecedents and affiliations with the Ring. Mr. Peckham and Samuel B. Garvin, the District Attorney, were present. Mr. Clinton had no idea that there was any intention on the part of the prosecution to try the case against Mayor Hall until it should be regularly set down for trial; and he should have had several weeks for making proper in- vestigations in regard to the jurors. The impanelling of the jury on the first trial had occupied four days. Mr. Clinton regarded it as of the highest importance that as much care should be used in selecting jurors on the second trial as had been exercised upon the first trial. When he left the court he casually remarked to Mr. Peckham that he would probably look in again in about half an hour or so. He went to his office, and had but just ar- rived there when a Court officer came for him, saying he was wanted in Court right away. He at once went to the Court, and was amazed to find that during his ab- sence of less than half an hour a jury in the case had been impanelled. Mr. Clinton, when he found that a jury had been impanelled under such circumstances, and the trial had been rushed on in such a remarkable man- ner, was indignant. He determined to withdraw from all connection with the case. He at once went to the Attorney-General, by whom he had been retained and under whose authority he had acted, explained the con- dition of affairs, and stated to him that he would not act as Counsel for the prosecution. The Attorney-Gen- ,eral told Mr. Clinton he could not blame him for with- drawing from the case. The result of the second trial of Mayor Hall was a disagreement of the jury. Mr. Clinton considered that his connection with these Ring criminal trials was ended forever. After the trial and conviction of William M. Tweed, in 1873, the trial of Henry W. Genet was brought on in the New York Oyer and Terminer. Mayor Hall was called as a witness by the prosecution, and gave impor- tant testimony against Genet, whose trial resulted in a conviction. This being one of the important trials grow- ing out of the Tweed Ring frauds, it would seem that after using Mayor Hall as a witness, the faith of the State was impliedly pledged that he should nut be fur- ther prosecuted. It was, perhaps, fortunate for him that such implied faith was not kept. Not long afterwards the prosecution brought on his third trial. To this he did not object. He was ready to meet his accusers face to face; he seized with avidity the opportunity to sub- mit his case to a jury of his peers. After a fair and im- partial trial in the Court of Oyer and Terminer of the City and County of New York, Judge Brady, of the Su- preme Court, presiding, Mr. Hall was triumphantly ac- quitted; and with this verdict the public, as well as his friends, should be content. In all the investigations in respect to the proceeds of Ring frauds, none were ever traced to Mr. Hall. There is no evidence that he ever reaped any pecuniary advan- tages from his political and official relations with those who composed the Ring. Since the termination of his last trial he has stood before the community vindicated from the charges made against him when the Ring frauds were exposed. He has figured somewhat prominently as a lawyer and a journalist from that day until the pres- ent time, and he has had, and he now has, the esteem and good wishes of the public. However much his natural amiability and his political ambition may have led him into mistakes of judgment, his friends never lost confi- dence in him; and the numerous investigations, public and private, have convinced those who once doubted, that nothing worse can fairly be imputed to him than the fault of not having been sufficiently vigilant as Mayor in discovering the frauds upon the city and county treasury, and in preventing their continuance; and of neglect, even to this extent, the jury, by their verdict, said he was not guilty. |
