The New York Herald Newspaper, March 9, 1872, Page 5

The Battery of “Objections” Resumes Hostili- ties, but is Eventually Si- Tenced by the Court, THE “CARVEY” BATTERY OPENS FIRE ‘The Great Plasterer Tells All He Knows About the Court Honse Frauds. Tweed’s Fifty Thousand Dollars to Manipulate the Legislature. Sixty Thousand Dollars for Plas- tering Two Houses for Walter Roche. ‘THE MAYOR'S POSITION STILL INTACT. The Public Excitement on the Inercase---An- drew J. Nervous and Ill at Ease, TENTH DAY’S PROCEEDINGS. ‘The excitement caused by the unexpected ap- Pearance of Andrew J. Garvey, the great plasterer, on the trial of Mayor Hall, during Thursday’s pro- ceedings, is on the increase. Yesterday it was almost impossible to reach the doors of the court room, 80 closely were they vesieged by a solid mass of people anxious to force their way inside. It re- quired all the efforts of the oMicersof the court, aided by the strong, massive doors, which, when once closed, were sufficient to resist any pressure Drought to bear against them, to keep back the surging and impatient crowd. All having actual business in the court room had wo pass through the clerks’ offices, and so through the Judge’s doer. Every facility was rendered 1n this direction, and 80 much inconvenience and delay was in this way prevented. But one query and but one thought was im the minds of all— WHAT WILL GARVEY TESTIFY TO? ‘This was the all absorbing subject of speculation and was only secondary to the desire to get a glimpse of the hero of the hour himsoli, It was very evident, nowever, that it was not love for the great plasterer personally that prompted all this eoulli- tion of popular feeling, but a desire to see the man ‘whoge name more than any others 1s mixed up with the Ring frands in connection with the new County House, and if Possible t3 hear his develop- ments and to learn which of all the ex-chiefs of Tammany would be most damaged thereby. He sat durmg the early part of the proceedings beside the reporter’s table, looking nervous and anxious, yet apparentiy eager vo be aguin called to the stand. THE COURT ROOM was filled much eariier than usaal. and the Chief Justice, counsel, jury, and aj) professionally en- gaged in the proceedings were promptly at hand. The Mayor entered entered with bis usual sang- froid and wok his accustomed seat. The ap- parition of Garvey on the previous day didn’t rufie him in the slightest degree, and all day yesterday he left the legal contest altogether m the hands of his abie counsel, bDusying himself apparently with taking notes of the arguinents of counsel for the prosecution and of leading points in the testimony of Garvey. An hour or More was consumed by Mr. Stoughton, for the defence, presenting and arguing OBJECTIONS 10 THE INDICTMENT, to the effect that unless Garvey’s clatin was & pro- per lability against the ctty n> duty was imposed by the statute on the Mayor ‘to audit; and hence, under the indictment for neglecy of that duty, no proof of its not being a lability was admissible, especially since the tndictment did not state it as a “hability” but a “claim,” and tnat, if this wasa Mability of the county’s, then the Mayor did no moral wrong—was not, in other woras, “wilful”? in passing it wiihout examination, This argument affects the indictment itself, and, if sustaimed, would quasn the indictment, MR. STOUGHTON’S OBJECTIONS AND ARGUMENTS. After the formal opening of the Court, Mr. Stough- ton resumed his argument of the previous day. ‘He said that since the adjournment of the Court he had very carefully considered the view which he would proceed to pre-ent, and in connection with this he ad collected two or three cases which he thought uustrated their force. He had no intention to go over the ground occupied yesterday, but he would Bay, in view of the character of tne testimony at- tempted to be given here, the question becomes very important to be considered and determined here. For if, as counsel for the defence confldently presume, that his testimony 1s utterly inadmissible, ‘we will be likely tosave a great deal of valuaple tame which would otherwise be wasted in the trial Of the case. He would in the first place call the attention of the Court to the first count on the in- dictment, all that was charged there beiog simply a WILPUY. REFUSAL AND NEGLECT to audit a claim said to have been presented on be- ball of Andrew J. Garvey. There is no suggestion tn that count, from beginning to end, that does not ‘apply as well to the second count. There is no sug- freee} or averment that the clatm thus refused to audited is an unjust or fraudulent claim, or that we knew it to beso or had any earthly reason to suspect it was so. No implication of a dishonest motive is suggested by the indictment, so far as the first couni is concerned. Now, assuming this first count to have been intended to present the offence ander the statute of a wilful reiusal to audit, sup- posing there had been a willul neglect to audit, and supposing that on this trial that fact had veen proven and Mayor Hall shouid here omer as his ex- -cuse or defence that the claim, or part of tt, thus presented for audit was unjust, would that be any answer whatever to the offence charged of wilfully reiusing or neglecting to audit? ‘ould not that offence be complete Irrespective of the question ‘whether the whole bill was due or a part irauauient or not? Is not the duty tharged and the duty Im- posed—the duty to audit—to examine and to allow or disallow a claim in whole or in part? And is not that duty disregarded when the Mayor retuses, irrespective (1 repeat the inquiry) whether the claim be fraudulent in part or in whole’ And again, ed ped in this Case we offered to snow that under the first count of the indictment this claim ‘Was not a county liability, but was a city lability, and, in addition thereto and aside irom that, that even supposing 1t was a county tlability, it was in- curred alter tne passage of the act. Under either of these propositions, then, 1t was notaclaim which the Mayor either was bound to audit or had a right to audit, So, then, if we prove either that this claim Was not a coanty lability, but a city liability, or if we prove, admitting tnat tt was @ county tia- bility, that 1t was incurred after the passage of the act, that would be a complete answer to the offence charged in the indictment. Now, @ question has arisen as to what is meant by ‘Itabilities incurred.’? . LIABILITIES INCURRED, means the contracting by the county of an indebted- ness or liabuity anteri r to April 26, 1870. When the gooas were furnished, or when the work was rlormed, ay suggested in the indictment, the Rabiny was incurred, There, 1s, therefore, no offence commutted unless the liability was incurred prior to the passage of the act of April26, When the material was furnished or the work performed then it was that the liability was incurred within the meaning of the act. Then, inasmuch that the Nablifty incurred must be one mcurred prior to April 26, and must be a county itability, without Which there arises noduty on the party of the Mayor or imposed upon him by tne act to audit any claim otherwise presented, these two indispensable ingredents—the proof of the liability being @ county liability, and that it was incurred prior to April '26—necessary to constitute an offence, are wanted in this case. Now, 98 to the second count in the indictment. it is charged that the Mayor, being bound to audit @ certain claim, did then and inere wilfully, uu- Jawlully and corruptly negiect to audit said claim or to examine into the validity and correctness of said claim, 4c. Now the charge on the second count presents no other offence than the ottence charged in the first count. They allege that vie three persons named in the Inuictment, including the Mayor, avcepted the trast of auditors and en- tered upon their duties, and it 18 averred that on the 6th of June it became and was the duty of said Hall and the others, and each of pene dit, and in auditing to examine into the validity and cor- Tectness of a claim stated on & certain paper pre: sented there and then for audit as a liability against the county, and that the said Hall, as one of sucit auditors, negiected to audit such claim. The aver- ment set forth here has no greater force or value than the averment on the first count, that it was the «uty of the defendant to audit and to examine into the valtuity aud correctness of said claim. It is heeessary to understand what the averments Are, Wilh ® view to ascertain Whetner ie NEW YORK HERALD, SATURDAY, MARCH 9, 1872.-TRIPLE SHEET, ee e AYOR HALL, [Rr eescciee sir sae audit the claim, then, assuming the duty y the fourth section to be binding on him, it would be @ non-periormance of duty and would become @ misdemeanor. Lut his objection was that the prosecution was not attempting to prove bus attempt to prove the actual and frauduient claim, and, peradventare, to show that Mayor Hall had a SBCOND COUNT Da¥FERS FROM THE FIRST. The second count proceeds to state that the said three officers, the Mayor, the Comptroiler ana the President of the Board of Supervisors sabscrioed a certain certificate in writing whereby ™ snostance it was faiseiy certified that such three oMicers had sudited the said claim, and had allowed the suia Of $41,562 42, whereas, in trath and in fact She said Abraham Qakey fall had not audited the said clatm and had not ascertained its correctness, Your Honor will observe we have here an allegation that @ certificate was made by these three oilicers that they had audited a claim, when in fact it 1s aieged that they had pot auaited it: but there 1s no allegation that the ciaim was a irauduleut or unjust one, or that the: certificate was given with the mntent of defrauding the county. ‘there ts no averment that the act was not totally innocent, utterly harmiegs and entireiy inconsequential of results, Having averred that this claim had not been audited, but that there had been a false cer Ulicate that It had been, It ts alleged that “the said Connolly, &c, paid the said claim to Andrew J. Garvey.” Your Honor will perceive tiat this certi- feate alleged to have been signed by these three Dersons 18 all to be @laise cercficate, not a cer- tincate of a ialse claim; not @ certificate that a ciaim had veen audited which they Knew or had reason to believe was false; nota certificate that tney had audited a claim which was not wholly due; and everything 18 10 be presumed 10 favor of hon- esty and innocence until ‘he contrary 19 proved; for 1t has been said that the law, like charity, thinketh evil of no ian, What allegation have we got, then? First, that the three auditors signed acertificate that they had audited a ciatin, when they had not; and second, that voat clalin was paid without any averment or suggestion teat 1b was lalse, fraudulent or unjust, or suspected so to be by either. What offence wouid be created vy that stale Of facta, Would that be “WILFUL NEGLECT OF DUTY ”? Is not the false certificate tnat they had andited en- Urely consistent with the proposition that they had not wilfully rerused to audit? Is the allegation tnat they nad certified that they had audited, when they had not, equivalent to an allegation that they had wiltally refused ty audit? ‘The charge comes then to this merely, thaf these three persons directed a claim to be paid without auditing it. 1 would like tosee an imdiciment trained that these three men, being bound to auait all couu‘y Mavilit es, had paid one of them without auditing it, Under wnat sec- aon would that offence come? Mr, ‘Tremain—it 1t had been corruptly done Would it not o¢ an offence? Mr. Stoughton—There 1s the very difficulty in this case. If it nad been stated that, kuowing the said claim to be iaise and iraudulent, these men, for ile Purpose of causimg 1b to be paid and tnerepy detrauding the county, hud to audit @ false and fraudulent Yalta’ ohio Was aad, “nae Would be an indictable offence. But without the allegation of fraud and knowledge on their part that it was fraudulent no offence is sated. Weal, I nave always been taught—I know very little of criminal law, and it 18 not necessary to study & great waile to learn it all—but 1 have always been taught ee seer in an Tigjepensable late every fact whic! const}in 9 an tydispensable rAd oat fo make ous the thine, We are not pracusing undef. thé Ode here, where you conform the pleading to the proof, and it is a Diessing that We are not under that which has done so much t curse our profession, ‘The Graqd Jury of the county—and they were sufiicientiy influenced to present all tie charges agaist my learned friend aod brother here that they suspected nim guilty ol—did not venture to put such a charge as that inte this indictment, Now, coming down to where I leit the second count, we bave NOTHING UNDER URAVEN charged but that they faisely certified that they had audited a claim which the 1aw presumes to be just, when they had not, and that it was paid. Tne Jase certificate or statement of aut periormed might well be made without the existence of wiliul neglect to andi it, 1 wish, then, to call Your Honor’s attention to the fact that in its very nature no offence 18 charged by tne allegauion of this false certiticave and its payment, and no other law makes it an offence without other ingredients whica are notaverred. Mr. Stoughton tren referred to 3 Lan- sing, page 77, to show the difference beiween imis- feasance in office and a wilful neglect to perform an official duty, or non-ieasance. He continued:—Ene- mies Nay Mob amanup to ine very portals of the Court; they may club bim antl knife bim under Its very porcn; but when they get within tneir hands become nerveless and the law rises up and takes its course accordimg to settled forms and established principles, And these set- ued forms and estaplished principles ave not only necessary for tbe protection of the uefendant, but also for ihe protection o: the Judge, for when the Judge, human as he 1s, may be urged by a vowe outside, he answers by saying, “I speak not for or of myself, but I speak the law; whacever thar 1s 18 not iny business, but 1 ts the result of a higher power, to which, if [ tail to conform, I fait myseif.” So inat the Judge, so protected by forms and rules, answers Wie disappointed HUNTER ARTER a victim, “I sacriiice only with the legal knife, wielded by legal bands.” There is always prejus dice enough againss the defendant. 1 have, Your Honor, to say to the jurv as they leave veir seats, “Permit no one to speak to you on the subject or this case, Let no human lips of charity say one word 1m justiiication or excuse of the aefendant.” But the ‘public prints may utter their denuncia- tions or arguments and the jury read those. ‘vhe Court does not say to them “Read nothing,’ but “Hear nothing that charity may offer, Lam powerless to prevent you irom reading that which malice suggests.” The time may come when a Court will conceive that 1t has tnat power, as well as the authority to warn the jury, as it does now very properly. Idesire to add that if it be an ta- dient of the offence that the claim was iraudu- jent, it must be averred im the indictment that the Mayor knew it to be false and fraudulent, aud, so knowing, refused to examine, or so know faisely certived that it had -been audited, M Stoughton briefly resumed the foregoing arguments, and called the attention of the Court to a number of cases and authorities, among oviers Archoold’s Criminal Pleadings, page 45; 15 Wenuell, page 279, ‘The People vs. Goif; 22 vol. N. Y. Reports, People vs, Tyler, page 180. ‘The Court—1 propose to rule upon this question now, Without hearing the counsel for the prosecu- tion, unless they desire to be heard and without giving my reasons for my decision upon any of the questions which have been discussed, for this gen- eral reason—that they will all be invoived in the subsequent view of the law which the Court will be called upon Ww take, and because I cannot with pro- priety settle questions of the admissibility of the evidence, invoiving the whoie subject mater of the indictment, a8 broadly as the learned counsel has presented it. As the counsel for the prosecution has been asked by the deience to state the reasons tor asking the question, I will make this present ruling prior to hearing tne extent of the inquiry which 1 suppose will be made, while all the effect of the evidence will depend on the nature of the evi- dence itself. I shall rule, therefore, for the present, that the witness may be asked all that he knows respecting this claim, the presentation of it, and all vhat he knows respecting it, down to the time of the payment of it, and that will embrace the ruling for the present. ‘An exception to the ruling of the Court was taken by tne defence, which, 1t was understood, should embrace the whole extent of the evideuce now to be taken, ANDREW J. GARVEY, who had some time previously quietly entered the court, and had sav with fixed tace listening to the greaier part of the foregoing arguineuts, was then again installed on the witness stand, und was ques- tioned as follows:— Garvey’s examination resumed—You stated last night that this exhioit 1s a fair copy of the accouut you presented; do you now recollect the nature of the claim. A. Yes, sir. q. Please answer tne question that [ put to you last night, whether that ciaim was a just and honest one? A. NO, sir. ‘This answer produced A PROFOUND SENSATION, as it made apparent the previous guesses made that the witness, 1m City Hall slang, meant “to squeal,’? ‘Q How was it made up? On what foundation, ifany, was it made up’ A. ‘That particular billy g es, sir? ®Mr. Smith objected to the question. He had understood His Honorto rule that this witness Might testify in regard to the nature and contents of the bill, and he objected to any question beyond the fact that it was & county claim, and an unjust one. if the object of the counse® in this case Mr. Smith continued, 1s to gratity the audience by F Mond them a history oi this claim and the nature of these ivems, and specifically to go into it, thas isone thing; but if'we are here for the purpose of contining the issue to the record, then we are confined simply to Vestimony that nas relation to the cnarge that is made, and beyond that tt cannot be carried. ‘The Court—My ruling i8 broader than you have stated. Mr. Smith—My client states that he is perfectly willing to have it ali in, but | did not understand Your Honor as ruling w allow them to go into a bill of particulars of tnis kind. If Your Honor says it was to that extent—— The Court—I will aliow this witness to testify to all that he Knows respecting the nature of this claim, the presentation of it, aud ail that was officially done respecting itdown to the time of its payment. ‘shat is about as precisely as 1 can ex- press myself, Mr. smith—He can speak of the nature of the claim without going Into particulars, ‘she Court—I willadd, “and as to the foundation of the claim,” wien is about the broadest word t could be user wo, ‘Tremain asked for the reading of the last question and called upon the witness io reply, which id as Lollows:— i GARVEY’S CONFRSSION, ‘A. In the latter partof April, 1s70—about the 20th, 1think—Mr, Woodward, Leputy Clerk of the Board of Supervieors, and James H. Ingersoll, asked me—— Mr, Smith—One moment— Mr. Garvey—I do not see how Ican continue my testimony without stating ali that was said to me. Mr. Tremam—You ean state whetner, in conse- quence of what they dia or said, you did something, and what you did. Mr, Garvey—Aiter what they said? I baa the fur. hing of the plastering of the Court House from a 1869, up to the present, and all that was oue— Jur, Tremam—I want you to confine yourself to ‘What occurred before this aceouat was preseuted in June, 1870, Mr. Garvey—It was necessary for me to have for the furmaning of the plastering and the materials, and ail repairs and alierations of that nature in the New Court house, $110,000 tor work due and in pro- gress; that Was avout the 20th May, 1870. Q. You wanted to get $110,900? A. That was actually Que tor work done then and in progress. Q. For work aud materials on the Court House that was due and would become due? A. Yea, sir; covering June, July and August, 1870, from tae 1st May; there was also due on county buildings $78,760, and on armories and drilt rooms $75,000; that was the money that I required to pay me for the labor, materials and expenses, and to allow me my proiits besides; besides inat, there was due to me, unpaid, from outside parti 000 that I Was expected to cover up in my bills; $50,000 of that was CASH TO MR. TWEED, to Albany, for the Legislature. * £, What ume? ir, Smith—pees that come within the range of your ruling, Your Honor? The Court—The witness must confine himself as far as possible to the particular bili referred to in tne indictment, THAT PROPORTION. Mr, Garvey—All the bills that 1 received naa an average proportion of this money on them, . Mr. Stougtiton—You must talk about this bill only, Mr. Garvey—1} will have to go mto a calewation and for the amounts on this particular bill; that wiil take me a hitie time w do. Mr. Tremain—This bill 18 @ part of a system of bills, add it woula be impossible to separate them, Tne Court—ls that so, Mr. Garvey’ Mr. Garvey— Yes, sir; to a great extent. ‘The Court—Then you may answer the question. Mr. Tremain—State tne general arrangement. A. This arrangement of ours was nearly all completed before I made up my bills ai all, Mr. Burriil—Our ovjection ts to this witness going into these other questions. ‘the Court—The witness having sald that it is im- Possible for him to separate these bills, I think he may auswer the question. You must confine your- sell, however, Mr. Garvey, a8 tar as possible, to the particuiar bul in question. MORE DISCLOSURES. Mr. Garvey—Well, the amount 1 claimed for work in the Court House and county buildings, and armo- ries and drill rooms was, alvogether, $264,060, for work done and im progress, and there was due to me from other parties, that | was expected tosquare on my bills, $126,000; and then | added on $5,000 for myself tor expenses tor the fall for potitical pur- oses—MY OWN asseasment—making, altogether, 05,660, ‘That was the money | expected to get back and get paid, and I received on my bills —— Objection having been taken, the witness was warned Lo confine hmaself to the bill in question as far as possivie, and continued: HOW THE BILLS WERE MADE UP. A. I had $395,660 that! claimed to be paid, and I made out this pill of $41,562 42, equivalent to its carrying a presumed proportion in ratio’ to the others. Tt (the excess) 18 supposed 10 be distri- buted equally over all the biils that I got paid. Mr. Burrill—We only want the excess on this bill. ‘The witness (excitediy)—You may easily tix yourself, Mr. Burnill. Mr. Tremain—Just answer your questions. You made out your bills with the view of obtaining a certain proportion of them, didn’t you? GARVEY'S SHARE. A. I received thirty-five per cent of the bil, minus: the interest; the interest had nothing to do with it; taking the net bill I got thirty-five percent of that tor payment of my work; | actually receivea a few hunared dollars more than that percentage, 1 ve- eve, on the total amount. Q And the accounts were made out on that "ho thal Sete back your money? A. Yes, sir, and the money that 1 had advanced; I received the original bill, pot the interest. Q. And thia was one of the bills thos made out—, that is to say, acopy o1 it? A. That is a pretty fair copy of that bill, Whao was the whole amount of the bilis that you ore on which you received back thi Objection having been taken, Mr. Tremain waived putting the question for the present. Q..At the ume that this particular bil was pre- sented were there not other bilis presented with 16 at the same time, and on the same day went througo the process of auditing f Mr. Burrill objected, and before the Court ruled upon the question a recess was taken. After Recess. The Court having re-opened, the examination of witnesses was continued as follows:— Q. You began yesterday by stating a portion of the Items which constituted the foundation of ths aad olver Claims? A, Yes, sir, ha Had you a paper giving all the items of this bill? =A. Cl A BRIBE TO TWEED, Q. Will you state the nalance of them? A. Well, there was $60,000 in cash sent by me to Mr. Tweed at Albany; my brother took it up to the Legislature; $60,000 more Is for work and expenses gt Green- Wich, Conn., m 1869 and 1870, for Mr, Wiliam M. eed, and work by his order at @ house at Coscob, the two amounts making about sixty thousand dollars for the two buildings and tor the house of Mr. ‘tweed’s friend; about thir- teen thousand doilars was for work done atthe order of Mr. Woodward, at Norwalk, Conn., and $3,000 for plastering two houses for Walter Roche, in Fifty-fiith street, which I gave him a receipt tor in the room down stairs but never gave him a bill for; $5,000 was for mysell; that [ anticipated tor my expenses for the fall campaign. Q What is that last item in amount? <A, Five thousand dollars, Bad nouse for Roche? A. Two houses for che, Q. And two for Tweed? A. Two for Tweed and one for a iriend of his. Q Who was that friend? Objection taken and sustained by the Court. , Q. I will ask you whether these four accounts were on printed blanks? A. Yes, sir. Q Where did you get the blanks? A, Inthe office of the Clerk ot the Board of Supervisors, Q Wno gave them to you? A, Sometimes they were given tome by Woodward and sometimes | was told to take them out of the desk, which I usually aid; they were kept there for tose who had pills to take them, . Did you receive at the Comptroller's office, vefore making out the bills, a written memorandum naming the amount at which you should make out the account ¢ Objected to, and waived for the moment by the prosecution, Whs this account upon the blank that was obtained at the Supervisors’ Chamber? A. Yes, sit. Q How soon alter you received tne blank did you fiitin! A. [think i usually had a few of these blanks by me; 1 had them in my desk at home; they were given ine {or the purpose of making out those accounts, Q. Now, then, take this particular account and give a history of it irom the tune you presented it until the time you received the warrant. State all you know about it, to whom you delivered it, and What took place i its passage? A, As near as I can judge that account was rendered— Objected to by the defence on the ground that the ‘witess admttted he had no distinct recollection of this particalar tll. The Court—Mr. Garvey, speak as near as you can recollect from your recollection, and where you do not recollect distinctly distinguish that part of the answer, Garvey—I think it was about the latter part of May that I presented tnfs and three other bills, WOODWARD’S MANIPULATION, Q. What did you do with this particular Dill? A. Igave it with, | think, three others to Mr. Wood- ward in the office of the board of Supervisors, and he looked at them; after just glanciag at them he took them over to Watson’s office. Q. Where was he when he received the bill? He was down stairs In the oMice of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Q. Did he have any particular part or that room assigned tohimy? A. Yes, sir. Q Was it ratied of? A. Yes, sir; he might have been at nis desk when I handed him the bills, but £ can't say; he was not there very oflen; 1am sure he was 1n the office, however. Q. Now, goon again. A, He took them over to Watson's office and left them with Watson. Q. Watson was tne Auditor? A. Yes, sir. Q How long had Watson acted as Auditor? A long time, but I cannot tell you exactly, Q. Several siged A. Yes, sir. Q As County Auditor? A, Yes, sir, Q. Woodward took them over to his ofice—where Was bis oftice? A. In the Comptrolier’s office, ad- joining Mr. Connoily’s; ne had a littie private room re, 4 thei Q. Was that opposite the hall where you enter the Comptroller’s office? A. On the Opposite side of the aan. Q,. On the floor below the present floor at the head of the stairs? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was that the usual office of the Auditor? A. Yes, sir, with 9 nice walnut parctiog, What did Woodward do with these vilis? A. I went over with Woodward, Q But what was the next thing you knew of the accounts’ A, On the 6th of June he found me—. . A GUILTY BARGAIN, Q Who did? A. Woodward; and we went Into a room down stairs—the chamber of the Board of Su- pervisors; we closed the door alter us; we got over nto & PRIVATE CORNER, and I gave him a check — Mr. Burrill—We have nothing to do with what took place between Woodward and the witness. A The Court—I suppose the testimony must be con- fined to what was doue belore the delivery of the warrant, ‘the witness—This was before the delivery of the warrant; I gave him ghe check before L got the warrant; I gave him a check for $110,635 15, Whom did you give it to? A. ‘To Wooaward. On whet bank? A. The Broadway Bank; then he gave me the Warrant and | signed receipts for the vouchers, I taking the pins out of the warrants myself; perhaps he may have heipe. me in taking the pins out, bat I can’t swear as to that. Q Was that check paid at the bank on your ac- count? A. Yes, sir; 1 went right over and deposited the Warrant; I hud wo make the account good or it would not huve been paid. ay Your account has beea written up since that? « Yes, sir, % Inciuding that check? A. Yes, sir. Tootion was made by Mr, Barrili to strike out all the preceding testimony, but by mutual consent was suspended for the present. itness then identified the blank forms of the cer- tificate of audit and the Comptroller's order tor the Warrant and the receipt 48 having been the 1orms atiached to his bills, GARVEY NOT PERJURED. Q, Was there any affidavit made by you In the form ‘ted in this printed blank (counsel here Tead over tne affidavit) which aflirmed the correct- ness of the claim presenied? A. No, sir. ‘Mr. Burrtll—I ovject to the last answer, because the question 1s irrelevant, and, in the second place, 4g not covered by the indictment, and thirdly, that there was no law requiring these affidavits \0 ac- company the claim. Mr, Tremaine—i wish to show the history of the case. The Court—On that ground I think the answer ad- missible, ahs . you make that afMidavit at any other time? Q. Di jnybody make it on your accountor in your bebaity A, No, sir, Q. before you received, or before you presented the account in question, dia you receive {rom Wood. ward & memorandum in writing, giving the amount of the account and also the date of tne account which you were requested to make out, fill up and present, and also @ generat memorandum of the subject matter that should constivute the account, Mr. Burri/l—Our only objection is8-that it is not connected with the defenuant, ‘The Court—I shall admitis under the statement of the counsel for the prosecution that he expects to connect it with vne accused; if he faus 1 shall instruct the jury ny the strongest terms I can com- Mt mand 10 0: re ‘Yes, sir; Wood- isregar ‘The wituess then answe! ward gave me a iiltie piece of paper contaming those memoranda,” Q. Did you beiore you received this memorandum from Woodward receive any instructions from Watson, the Auditor, in relation to your taxing Lana in regard to your accounts from Wood- a ward? The Court modified the question so as to make it read what the witness did in consequence of any instructions he had thus received, A. Imade the bills out in accordance with the Memorandum given me by Woodward, under that heading and for work prior to such @ date, and the total of the amount; the memorandum sald, ‘Give me bills or bills to such an amount against the Court House, dated prior to such a date; that was the contents of the paper. Q Is there any portion of that account that you can identily a8 being embraced M the memoran- dum given you by Woodward, whetner the printed part or in relation to the Court House or the nead- Ing Of such expenditures? A. ine sum total—that ts, ail except the designation of the viii for plaster- ing work against the Court House —the sum total 18 the same to a iraction; the date is approximaung to suen a date; of course i could not give it on a Sunday. Mr. Tremaine then renewed his former question a8 to What instructions had been given to witness by Auditor Watson iu regard to Woodward. This question was, of course, at once objected to, and, after a briei discussion of it, the Court ad- journed until Monday morning, at eleven o'clock. “WHAT ABOUE GARVEY?” Expressions of Opinion from Those Who Know and from Those Who Don’t Know, Appearance of ‘Michael An- gelo” Garvey. The Effect of What He Said in Court Yes- terday Upon Prominent Politicians. WHAT HE DID WITH $5,000. Garvey Denounced for Being Treacherous to His Friends, Interviews with Garvey’s Brother- in-Law and Friend. Mr. Tweed on the Side of the Ring Plasterer. What “the Boss” Thinks of the Conduct of Mayor Hall’s Defence. How Garvey Has Spent His Seven Weeks of Leisure, WILL HE BE_ ARRES' TED? The reappearance of Andrew J. Garvey continued yesterday to be the absorbing topic in political circles. The course that he has taken was almost universally condemned, Inasmuch as it is a perver- sion of the proverb that there shoud be “honor among thieves.” “Any man,” sald @ vene- rable city democrat, who has in his time done faithful service to his party, ‘48 scoured who turns State’s evidence, and is always despise. I have suffered pecuniarily as much as any man by the break-up of the Tammany party, and | would have all the thieves punished; but don’t do it in this mean way.” This old gentieman’s sentiment was endorsed by the group who surrounded him, ali of whom said, “Andy will suffer for this before he gets through.”’ Political partisanship, both In and outside the court room, assumed a tone of great indignation, which was not, however, founded entirely on the fact of his having turned State's evi- dence, but was intensified by the character of the evidence wich he volunteered. Among the many politicians in the Court yesterday afternoon when Garvey was on the standé¢was ex-Cham- berlain Bradley. When Garvey was giv- ing the detalis of the mode in which the amount on the warrant was disposed of he said that he had appropriated for himself $5,000 to pay hiy assessment of election expenses, This volun- teered admission from THE GREAT PLASTERER prompted the exclamation immediately from the ex- Chamberlain, “Ratuer than have said that I would have put @ bulet through my ead.” It is tis moral turpitude that nas excited the anger of the Ring poltticians, and has struck them with dismay, and completely demoralized them when any endeavor was made by them to arrive at an estimate of the effect of Andy’s evidence, not only on the prosecution of the Mayor, but as to tne use that may be made of him on the prosecution of the other Ring imdictments. Mr. Garvey appeared to be weil taken care of. His brother, Mr. John Garvey, and two other gentlemen never left him while he was waiting in the aute-room to give his evidence, and joined him immediately on his ieav- ing the witness stand. Mr. John Garvey says that his brother has been In the city over @ month, nearly all the time at his own house, and going out into the city and neighborhood occasiouaily in @ close carriage, ‘The secret of Andy's return has been well kept, he said, simply because the friends and relatives who were en- trusted with the secret had too much honor to reveal it. He asks that the public reserve their Juugment of the conduct of his brother in giving this evidence antil he has gos Uirough as a witness for the people. MR, GARVEY’S FRIENDS claim that he nas been villifed and charged with committing frauds which, if frauds, were not committed entirely tor his own bentit; but that the largest portion of the money that he has been charged Witu receiving, was re- ceived at the instance and in the interest of others, He regards it as his duty, under the circumstances, to clear himself, and the result must show whether the course he has taken Will be successful in this di Tection or not. ‘There was @ discussion yesterday, in and out of the court room, as Lo Mr. Garvey’s po- sition tn reference to the criminal proceeaings that initiated before he left the country, ‘the facts given in the HERALD yesterday as to the Sherif’s warrants were confirmed by a jater interview with Mr. Brennan. ar. Garvey’s liverty Will not be interfered wita by any process that has been enirusted to the Sherif, and which has become inoperative by lapse of time. ‘The facts in relation to UNIS aspect of the great QUESTION OF THE DAY are that the District Attorney nas Bench warrants in relation to the Garvey frauds which he can render operative atany moment. [tis understood, however, that there 18 a compact enteied into by which, under certain circumstances, Garvey’s liberty will not be interfered with. The District Attorney has been called upon, it is alleged, to do his duty in this mat- ter; but that omcial is under the impression that he is doing bis duty now, aud he will continue to do it in accordance With his oath of oMice. In this connection this facy must not be lost sight of in obtaining a calm review of the present position of affairs—namely, that no one has any power to grant Garvey any immunity irom arrest, so loug a4 the warrants, issued upon the Snding of c&rtain indictments remain un- cancelled, Various Opinions were expresaed yes: terday among Mr, Garvey’s former associates as to any change in HIS PERSONAL APPRARANCE, A gentleman who has known Mr, Garvey intimately for some years, and has been @ strong and close political iriend of his aa well a8 An associate 19 nis social pleasures, told a HERALD Teporter yesteraay that he should not have recog- nized Garvey he met bim in Broadway. Even When he saw him on the witness stand it was some moments betore he fully made up his mind that it was the veritable and renowned plasterer, with whom he had had many and many a good time. This gentleman says that Garvey has lost a good portion of his physical ponderosivy, has an expression of care and haggardness which he had not before, and lus hair 18 now silver-lined, whereas in happier days bis iocks were like the raven. There was & pre- vailing impression in the court room that the Mayor’s counsel have darkened their wisdom by @ multitude ot words, and have not done much good to their client thereby either on the mind of the Court or jury. The Mayor will conduct the cross-examina- tion of Garvey, and it is fully expected will greatly damage the evidence in chief by his skill, founded on hig long practice aa District Attorney, and the fulneas of his knowledge as to the modus operandt of the proceedings of the Board of Audit and his du- tes mm connection therewith, INTERVIEW WITH MR, GARVEY'S FRIENDS Falsty of Prevailing Rumors—ANl Protonce of Concealment Denounced—Candor and Fair Play the Order of the Day—The Peo- ple Advised to “Wait and See.” r A HERALD reporter callea at the headquarters of police yesterday aiternoon to see Detective Clapp and ascertain his views upon the situation, Mr. Clapp is a brother-in-law of Andrew J. Garvey and 4s supposed by the gencrat public to possess a good deal of interesting information upon the vexed question of the hour, Mr, Clapp is a gentleman in the prime of life and has been attached to the detective force for a considerable period, He worked bis way trom the force to the position he now holds, and seems likely to be able to retain it, despite the tempests that may come to shake the police snip, Mr. Clapp martied the senlor of the two sisters, and Mr. Garvey soon after followed his example by taking the younger one under the pro- tection of his substantial wing. Detective Clapp met the reporter with his accustomed poilteness and the following conversation took: place:— “Mr. Clapp, I would like to ask you a féw ques- tions about Mr. Garvey ?”” “Very well, sir; anything I can do for the HERALD Iwill do with the greatest pleasure.” “You are a relative of Andrew Garvey, I under- stand?” “Tam his brother-in-law, sir?” “Then, if you are on good terms with the family, you can give the public some interesting informa- tion about the sudden appearance of that gentleman in the city ?”” “Well, as to its Deing sudden I don’t know, but L am afraid you give me credit for too much knowl- edge of the subject.” “Perhaps it is that you don't want to say anything about it.” “That may be so, too.” “You certainly were aware that Mr. Garvey was “I have a very bad memory for dates.” “Do you remember the shtp he came nome in?’” “It was one of the Cunarders, | think; but really 1 am not sure.” “It Was quite recently, was it not??? “Well, yes; he has not been here along time. If he had you gentiemen of whe press would most certainly have Known it,” “Avout how loug do you suppose he has been in New York 7” “1 really could nottell you; I am a detective, as you Know, and | am obiiged to attend to my regular duties here as au officer of the force ; consequentiy, waile | am attending to my own business | have very litte ume to devote to the affairs of Mr. Gar- vey.’ “Still you must be acquainted with what is going on in your own family.” “Certainly 1am ; aud you must also be aware that 1am not in @ position to put you in possession of all my family aifairs.”” “Well, of course, I don’t expect that, but there is @ supposition in the public mind that you could give some inveresung detalis regarding the return of Mr. Garvey, and the HERALD is about the best means of conveying these tacts to the peopie.” “If 1 knew anything about Mr. Garvey’s affairs L may be incliued to give them to the people, but, to be entirely candid with you, I know absolutely nothing about them, One thing I can do tor you, however, ts to introduced you to an intimate irtend of Mr. Gar- vey. He knows ali about him, and he may be in- clined to talk to you. 1 you will go with me 1 wul take you to him.’” Detective Clapp accompanied tne reporter to a Well known hotel in the viciniiy of Police Headquar- ters, and introduced him to the gentleman tn ques- uuon, Alter some general conversation the reporter conversed with the iriead to whom he had the in- troduction, ag follows:. “How long bas Mr. Garvey been in town ?” “I don’t want my Dame used just at present, You understand.” “Yes, periectly.”? Turning to the bar the friend of Mr, Garvey sal “Harry, I think we would like a glass of wine,” Harry ministered to the gentleman’s desires and he emed comparatively happy. ow, sir, You Want to Know how long Andrew J. Garvey bas been in town??? “ please.” xactly seven weeks.”” “It naa beea given out that he was in Jersey since his return.” “Tnat 1s not correct. He has not: been tn Jersey, absolutely has not put his foot in the country—you Know 1618 MOU & part of the United States—siuce his return.” “Jt must have been very dreary for him, shut up in a house in New York all this time 7”? The genteman smiled pecuilarly and satd:— “Shut up? Cillton, give us some cigars. Why, sir, he was no more shut up than you or I, On the con- trary, he was continually abroad.”’ “Aproad! Where? In New York ?”” “in this city and Brooklyn: i Prospect Park, In the Central Park, up and down Broadway every day, and on ali the principal thorougifares of tae cit, mn foot??? es, on foot and In his carriage. He went to a theatre on Broadway last mgt, and stood lor, per haps, half an hour at the barroom counter when he came out. “He does not seem to be afratd of the bullets that are sald to be in Waiting for him in Case he taiks too muchy “rhere may be plenty of people ready with bullets for him, but you inight bet the HEKALD agatnst all the newspapers in the world not one of them will ever tind @ place In the body of Andrew J, Gurvey.”” “You seem to be very confident.’ “1 am, sir; and when all this story is told you will see with what reason.’? “Do you know anything about the conditions upon which Mr. Garvey came back ?"” “Well, ldo, and I don’t. Ihave a sort of general idea in 3 he came home, the same as he has himself; but there are no cunditions that 1 can tell ou.” “Phere is a rumor to the effect that he is to turn State’s evidence, to secure his own release from tue charges against him ?” “Well, | don’t want to say anything abont that, for tt would 100k like compromising you; but wait and see. I know that some ol these gentiemea who are quaking in their boots now because of his dra- matic retura to life woull like to see him put sud- denly out of the way, or have such filth cast upon him as they themselves dread. [have only to say to you, and througa you to tne public, ‘Wait and and see.’ !? Thanking the gentleman for his courtesy the re- porter withdrew. THE “BOSS ” SPEAKS, What He Knows and Thinks About Garvey—He is Pleased with His Return, Criticises Mayor Hall’s Defence, While Exonerating That Individual—How He Would Have Run the “Old Thing.” A reporter of the HERALD yesterday called upon and interviewed William M. Tweed. He leisurely climbed the stairs of No, 85 Duane street, and, cast ing furtive glances to the right and left, discovered the legend:—‘William M, Tweed’s office, room No. 7.” Trying the door knob it refused to yield to nis gentle touch, and the searcher after the ex-Sachem of Tammany felt that his visit to that eaifice was likely to prove abortive. <A still, smail voice whis- pered,, “THE KNOB MAY LIE; try your Angers.” ‘The fingers came in violent Collision with the door panels, and the quick ear of the searcher after knowledge detected an animated Movement within. An tnstant after the lock obeyed the summons of ite chief and the reporter stood face to face with a familiar countenance, whose owner in deep baritone asked:— “What can I do for you!" “T wish to see Mr, Tweed on important business.’ ‘The janitor looked perplexed, opened the door, and invited his visitor in. “What can ido sor your” he asked. «Tell Mr. Tweed, Mr. ——,Of the HERALD, wishes to see nim.” “all right, sir,” was the response, and the janitor ——— - disappeared, leaving his visitor in tne custody of @ small boy. ina brief space of time the courteous oMctal returned, and, throwing open a door, please antiy remarked:— “MR TWEED 18 IN, and wil be pleased to receive you."” Entering the door the reporter was suddenly Placed in thé presence of tae ‘Boss’? of oid Engine Company No, 6, who greeted him most cordially, with the remark, “Glad to see you, ; how have you been?” The room 13 ONE OF MR, TWEED’S PRIVATE RETSEATS, and the walls bore testimony to us love of art, Be» sides portraits of the celebrated members of tne King, some of whom were his ,earliest associates in political lie, there were exposed @ number of old: painungs of rare vaiue, which were taken in at & glance, While tnis survey of the surroundings was. beiag had the Chief of No, ¢ courteously inquired fou news, and finally dropped into his chair, Never had Mr. ‘'weed appeared to him to better advantage. The old CAPTAIN OF THE DEMOCRATIC CLAN for once seemed to be relieved irom the cares of office, aud ready for a good, long talk, such as the more modern sachems of Tammany delight to par- ticipate in, Fipally, the pommt was struck by the visitor, who quietly remarked :— “Weil, Mr. Tweed, did you expect an inter- viewer,’? “Well, I've been let alone for some months, but T made up my mind that to-day [ would likely receive calls from my old luterviewers, that 1 am always glad to see.” “Weil, what do you think of Garvey’s sudden ap- pearance in the city’ 1t is said by one of the morn- ing journals that one of YOUR BONDSMEN HAS ‘WEAKENED’ and proposes to surrender you to the Shee?” Mr. Tweed, who seemed 10 be in an abandon mood, and highly clated at the turn things had taken, straightened himself up to nis full beignw and rapidly answered :— “It is lalxe; every one of my bondsmen ts a frien of mine, from whom L have uo official secrets, Eachi joined in my bond with @ lull Knowledge of the re« sponsibility they assumed, aud not one of them la disposed to retreat from uis action, Why, were: they to do so, | have other friends who will go my; ball for four million more.’? “But another paper intimates that you have left,. and that your rooms at the aietropolitan Hotel were closed last evening Y” “They were not ciosed, although I am rarely im: them alter five o'clock in the evening.” “It seems that GARVEY’S APPEARANCE IN COURT yesterday was @ surprise to every one except the prosecution, Can it ve possible that Andrew J. has Deen In the City all the tine, and 18 NOW produced: , at the supposed opportune moment to change the: entire policy of the defence? | have thought that ha: never left the country, but has been here in the city all the time.” “Oh, there can be no doubt but he left the coun-- try: but he has evidently returned, Of that there: can be no question,” “AS A WITNESS, FOR THE PROSECUTION 1? “Yes, | guess 80; he no doubt will testily as the prosecution desire. Were it my case { would not have objected to his evidence, a8 Was done yesterday, MAYOR HALL IS EVIDRNTLY INNOCENT of any complicity in the frauds charged, but it ap« pears to me that he has not the most astute crimi< nal lawyers. Had it been my triai I would not have gblected to the admission of Garvey’s evidence ax a. RG aecatiee of your triai ; when is It likely to come mn “I don’t know ; but [ am ready. When it does hay may be sure 1 don’t want it belore Juage Daly.’ “and why, may I ask?” “Because, While I have no objections to Judge Daly, dnd considerhim eminently fitted for an in~ veshigation of this character, | have no desire that my case shall come on out of the regular order ; and) I do not fear to appear in any Court of the city, and trust to ts for MY VINDICATION.” “But, do you really think Garvey has turned State's evidence ”” “Yes"’—(Mr, Tweed hesitated)—“my Impression is that he has.” “And what effect wilt it have on the trial of the: Ring men?!’ “None, that I see, As far as I am concerned I any glad to hear of Garvey’s return, His evidence may’ be very important, or it may not be. As lar as I any personally interested | am ready tor trial, no matter. who Is present.'? “But, Mr. Tweed, you have doubtless observed that yesterday GARVEY WAS SUDDENLY CUT OFF by the defence wuen on the eve of responuing to & question 1” “see that such was the course. Had it been my trial 1 would have asked my counsel to wave bis op- Jection And permit the witness to answer, 1 think, as 1 said before, that Mayor Hall has not the best criminal counsel, and if he had such men as t could name they would not have objecved tw the adimis« sion of the evidence. My experience in crimmak matters, had it been my Case, would have told ina Uhat the evidences should have been admiited, and 1 would have trusted to the counsel 1 had selected! to overrule my opinion or approve it. While 1 can- didly believe that Mayor Hall has not participated im any alleged trauds upon the city or County, I think HIS COUNSEL HAS MADE A SAD MISTAKE, I would have admitted ull the evidence tnat the prosecution proposed to iurnish through Garvey, and then, by @ searching cross-exXamination, com- pelied Garvey to tell what propositions and what in- ducements had been made to him to testily. in this way I would have furnished the Court wich the incentive there was, if any, for Garvey to testily, and It must, a8 @ matter of course, bave had its effect upon the Court. In this particular 1 think Mayor Hail has yielded too muci to the advice of coupsel.’’ ‘this actually ended the interview so far as the re~ porter felt jusiified to take advantage of Mr. ‘tweed’s couriesy, and {or a tew minutes the inter- viewed and interviewer chatted oa general topics, relative to the policies of the Stute and nation, ant especially regarding Governor Hoffman’s action ia the removing the Health Uflicer of tue Port. On this matter Mr, Tweed was very “prynounced” in favor of the late Health Ofticer, and expressed his astonishment at the removal of that oilicer. ‘The reporter, when the conversation lagged, sud- denly discovered a tull sizea PORTRAIT OF COMMISSIONER HANK SMITIT hanging on Tweea’s walls, and casually remarked :— “Lsee you have Hank Suuth’s picture suil nere* You are hut ashamed of it, Mr. ‘weed ¥"? “Ashamed of it! Why should I be??? “He 18 @ good-hearted fellow.” “Yes, and & man that is more sinned against? than asiuner.”” “All the papers of the city don’t seem to think So,'’ ventured the reporter. “Nevertheless, they misrepresent him, That mat Smith, has done all that his financial condition wie permit to bring out the savings banks, He spent every cent he could to protect the depositors of THE GUARDIAN SAVINGS BANK, and I came in with $60,000 to assist them out,, Hank Smitn may be lied about, but [ vell you he will stand by @ friend to the last, and spend his las doilar to protect his reputation. He has done ae he could, and when @ man does that he should pe, let alone.” ‘The above is briefly the substance of tne mter- view that lasted for half an hour; but while no notes were taken by the interviewer, WhO does not proses to give Mr. TWweed’s precise language, 1t is certain that that gentieman has not been misrepresented, THE INSURANCE INQUIRY. Mr. Foley’s Committee Do Not Come te Time—Miller’s Removal Contradicted. The sub-committee on insurance again failed ta putin an appearance yesterday, and at the hour named for assembling not @ member was present. Mr. Barnes announced that he had received a de- spatch trom Chairman Fuley announcing that the further hearing nad been adjourned until next week. 1t18 probable that the committee will meet on Monday morning il Lhe members can be spared. from their seats in the Assemoly, The publication of & despatch to the effect that Mr. Miller had been called upon to resign yesterday called forth the following card from that gentieman,. addressed to We press, Mr, Miller at once left for Alvbany:— To THE EptToR OF THE HERALD :— ‘The statement by telegram in thie morning's Timer, from Albany, signed +8." to the etfect Governor Hoffman had advised me to resign, is utterly false, MaRoH 6, 1872, GEORGE W. MILLER, PAYMENTS BY THE COMPTROLLER, } Comptroller Green made the following payments yesterday, viz.:— Salaries Department of Public Works, for Janu ise 815,372 9 Mec! ber 1, 71, to 6,719 50 1871, to Januar; meee ss poy ph 10,374 00. oe “as ¢¢ 88,000 00 In addition to the disbursements of yesterday, above, the Comptroller paid 165 persons the sum ol $4,200 for services rendered as inspectors, canyas~. sers, poll clerks, &c., at the last election, THE ERIE BLUE STONE RING, Mr. Kilgour’s Connection Therewith and Hie Antecedents. An article published in the HERALD on the 28thy ult, in reference to the above has caused the great- est possible excitement among all whom it con- cerns. ‘he articie stated that Mr. Kilgour, the Su-: ‘intendent of the New York and Pennsylvania Blue tone Company, was ‘%s poor quarryman from, Ulster county, whose assets did not amount to £3,000 ail told, and who has since made over one hundred thougand doliars by this transpor- tation of stone,’’ and that ‘he is now the owner of @ magnificent house at ” Pagaaic, N. J. We have the greatest ble pit on the autnority of vhe ingstod Journal Le ee bus paper published tm Mr. rs tuat Mr. Kilgour was not @ eg arty mann, wee was an excellent quarryman, and tn&t at the time he @mbarked 1m the stone business at Pond Kady he held real estate i the county vo at least eight umes oe and tat be was reverted to be worta 0