The New York Herald Newspaper, January 21, 1873, Page 5

THE COURTS. THE TWEED RING TRIAL. Garvey on the Stand All Day—His Peregrina- tions Abroad—More Abroad in His Claims Against the City—Diamond Presents to His Wife—An Exhaustive Cross-Exam- ination Not Yet Exhausted—A $20,000 Note Endorsed by Garvey, but Disavowed by Him—A New Insight to Ring Tactics. THE JUMEL ESTATE CASE. Continuation of the Great Jumel-Chase- , Bowen Suit—The Plaintiff's Arrange- ment for the Expenses and Prose- cution of the Litigation—Ten Per Cent in Hand, with Interest on Costs and Disbursements, SUSINESS IN THE OTHER COURTS. Sammaries—Value of Brooklyn City Bonds—A Slander Suit—Decisions. The Tweed trial attracted a large number of spectators to the Court of Oyer and Terminer yesterday in anticipation of lively proceedings. The cross-examination of Mr. Andrew J. Garvey Decupied the entire day, and was not closed when. the Court adjourned. Yesterday Commissioner Osborn rendered his @ecision in the matter of Henry William Morga: who had been charged with forging the endorse- ments of George Pim & Co., of Liverpool, England, to the amount of £1,100, The accused had been im the employment of Pim & Co, astraveller. The case was submitted to the Commissioner without argament on either side, and he now holds that, on the-evidenée as it stands, Morgan must be re- manded to await the President's warrant of ex- tradition. Ernest Nelke, of Saxony, was yesterday brought before Commissioner White, and charged, on the complaint of the Consul General of Germany, with kaving embezzled 700 Prussian thalers from letters which were entrusted to him, as letter carrier, to Geliver. It appeared that the accused fied from Baxe-Gotha, went to Chicago, and was brought on to this city under a warrant issued by Commis- Moner Shields for his arrest. The examination Raving been opened, the accused confessed his guilt, and he was accordingly remanded by Com- Miesioner White to await the President’s warrant of extradition. George F. Dunning, Superintendent fn the Assay OMmee, of this city, was indicted in July, 1869, for having embezzled money gf funds, the property of the\government. He has been arféated on a befich: warrant, and upon being brought before Commis- sloner Shields was held in $20,000 bail for trial. Mr, Ketchum, Register in Bankruptoy, has cer- ‘ified to Judge Blatchford a question respecting alleged misconduct on the part of Mr. Samuel Hirech, @member of the bar, while conducting certain bankruptcy proceedings 1n the case of one Bach before the Register. Judge Blatchford has issued an order ealling upon Mr. Hirsch to state what he has to say in reply to the complaint con- tained in the Register’s certificate. ‘Thomas Coleman, who had enlisted in the United States Army, was brought up on habeas corpus yesterday before Judge Blatchford. Coleman sought his release irom the army on the ground that he was under age at the time of his enlist- ment, The Judge ordered the young man to be discharged upon his father paying back to the gov- ernment the value of the outfit the recruit had aoeived. The hearing of the case of Geerge Washington Bowen vs. Nelson Chase was resumed yesterday in the United States Circuit Court betore Judge Ship- man andthe special jury. The whole of the day ‘was taken up by counsel for defendant in reading depositions taken upon the present and former trials of this suit. These depositions showed that the plaintiff, Bowen, accor¢ing to his own state- ments, had entered into an arrangement with two parties to conduct this litigation for him; that he ‘was to advance no money beyond the expense of taking the depositions and that these two parties were to have 10 per cent of what they could col- lect out of the suit, and payment of all money ad- vanced by them for expenses, with interest there- on. The trial will be continued to-day. THE TWEED TRIAL. Andrew J. Garvey Takes the Day to Himself—A Remarkable Batch of Tes- timony—His Trip to Europe—All About His Wirse’s Diamonds and the “Boss’” Silver Present. A dense crowd was in attendance at the Court Of Oyer and Terminer yesterday morning to hear the proceedings inthe Tweed trial before Juage Davis. Of course the great interest was to hear what Andrew J. Garvey had to say in his cross-ex- amination as tothe hows and whys of the kinks and dodges by which the famous robbing “ring” had filched tne public funds. The cfowd in at- tendance, indeed, seemed much more eager for the details than on any preceding day, chiefly be- cause it was expected that there would be more lively sparring between the cross-examining counsel and the witness. Sherif Brennan, Coroner Young, and quite a number of public officials dropped in during the day just to see “how the old thing was working,” as the “Boss” himself was once wont to say. The proceedings as a whole were extremely interesting, though perhaps alittle dry, as there was not so much sparring a8 was anticipated. The following are the proceedings :— A. J. GARVEY'S TESTIMONY. Andrew J. Garvey, recalied to the witness stand, testified that eneof the fourteen checks deposited im the Broadway Bank was deposited by Ingersoll, Mr. Woodward being out of town. Crose-examined—I do not know that Iam joined in the prosecution for a million of dollars with Mr. ‘Tweed, but I saw it in the papers; I do not know that any application was made on my behalf to the Attorney General to prevent my a@rrest in that action, but 1 heard so from my brother; I saw in the papers that my bail was fixed at $600,000; I sawin the pgpers last August @ copy of aletter from the Attorney Gen- eral to the Sheriff, telling him not to arrest me; I don’t know how it came to be written; I never spoke to the Attorney General on the subject; the substance of the letter was, “M. T. Brennan, Sher- iff, I have to request that you will not, in making arrests on the civil suits, arrest Andrew J. Gar. vey,” and it was signed, ‘General Barlow.” @ Did youever read that more than once—dia you commitit memory? A. No, sir; and I don’t think I have it very correct now. Q Then you have a very good memory; you have it almost word for word; when did you read it last? A. The Sheritf showed it to me this morning in his ofice. Q. Did you ask for it? A. No, sir. Q@ Did you read it carefully? A. No, sir; just fooked at it. Counsel here proposed to read a copy of the let- ter, toshow that the witness has AN EXCELLENT MEMORY, except when the shoe pinches, and then it is “non mi ricordo.” Judge Davis refused to allow either the copy or ‘the original, remarking that counsel had the letter, and what more did he want? m Mr. Tremain withdrew the objection and allowed to be read, @ Do you kaow anything about indictments | Pry NEW YORK HERALD. TUESDAY, JANUARY 2], 1873—TRIPLE SHEET. against you for forgery in the third degree? A. If those are they are in your hands that is the frst I have seen of them, Q When did you ever hear ofthem? A. Through the newspapers, J think early in February, ’ Q. Has any warrant been,gerved on you on these charges? A, No, sir, Q. You have never been asked to give bail on these charges? A. No, sir. Q.Do you know how that came to pass? A. (Alter a pause,) It may be that the parties know £ am here and am not going to run away. Q. Have you never heard of an arrangement that they were not to proceed against you if you gave testimony against Mr. Hall and Mr. Tweed? A. There is no such arrangement in existence. Q. 1 don’t ask you what is in existence. Have you no impression that the lenity arises from the testimony you gave and are to give against Mr. Hall and Mr. Tweed? A. I know that unless I tell the truth I am in a pretty bad fix. (Laughter.) Q. Are you not aware that unless there is some arrangement to protect you, you are Mable to the consequences of what you say? A. I am aware that I must tell the truth. WHAT HE BELIEVES. Q. Are you not aware that your answers on Fri. day establish a crime against you? A. 1 believe I am slightly culpable, but I tell the truth regardless of consequences ; I never thought of consequences. Q. Do you want the Court and jury to understand that you had no thought of the consequences to yourself when making your statements? A. (Im- petuonsly.) I didn’t care about myself, and I don’t now, What can I say more definite? I am telling the truth, regardless of consequences to myself. Q. Then you want the jury to understand that’ there is'no arrangement by which the conse- quences of your testimony on Tuesday shall not at- tach to you? A. Arrangement with who? Q. Answer my questien. ‘know very well; T mean the Attorney General Mr. O’€onor told me if I told the truth on the stand to) be the judges, no harm would When was that? A. In January. . What did you mean, then, by saying that you are here to tell be truth regardless of conse- juences? A. Dmean 1am gone; I am lost; unless tell the truth Iam alost man. (Laughter.) Q. Whoare to be the judges? A, They. gH} ‘A. ‘Therpeople. How can they all hear what you say? A. 1 suppose it is Mr, O?Conor. When did he Reon? A. I spoke to him twice at his house after I'came back. ¢. Didn’s you try to conceal, your arrival? A, T didn’t advertise it. Q. Wasn't there an effort to keep it still? A, I kept still myself. a Q. What steamer did youcome by? A. 1 didn’t come by a steamer. Q. How—you didn’t come on a telegraph wire ? A. I came by express train from Boston. Q When you leit Kurope what point did you touch here? A. Halifax. e a ae did you sail irom and when? A, From pool. Q. Under what name did you register? A. An- drew Jatters; that 1s my name, 9% It is part of yourname? A. Anything wrong in that? (Laughter.) I arrived in nine days, so you see I traveiled very quick. Q. You leit in September? A, I was driven away. Q. Under what name did you leave by steamer ? a My Ved took my ticket in the name of Mc- jonne! oy, After you were baptized McDonnell you didn’t ‘object ? jpaqe—That is an improper question, Mr, Coun- sellor. cried if I said “ehristen’ Your Honor would object ¥ i idge—Yes: you must put the question prop- erly. mn When they cailed) me McDonnell I laughed, Q Men did you take the mame of Jaffers? A, When I got to ie. ‘That isin Switzerland? A. Yes. Were you aware that there was no extra- dition treaty with Switzerland? A, There is, and has been for many years. Q, Dees it cover such offences as might be’ im- Puted to you? A. It does, Q. By what steamer did you leave? A. The Nes- rian. Q. What was the date of your arrival at Halifax? rs Icannot remember without looking at my ary. Q, And you don’t want to look at your diary pyceuselrre letter i bes be wa ; ere you ised in any way when you touched here? A Except the side whiskers were grown; I hadn’t been shaved, ‘Q Was there any ebject in letting the side whiskers grow? A. Ne, sir; but the shavers are not good ever there. (Laughter.) Q. Did any one come over with you? A. Yes, my cousin, Rishard Owens. ‘The witness stated in reply to further questions that his wite went with him; they went to Basle; he arrived there in October, 1871, and remaine over ® month, and then his wife went back; he wished to come back to this country, but was afraid until he should have some chance to explain himself; he wrete to his brother Joun, in this city, sending him some papers in extenuation, to be given to his lawyer, Mr. Gilbert, to be used in de- fending any suits that might be brought; William Kennelly, of No, 4 Pine street, a kind friend, sng- gested to his wile to call in Mr. O’Conor; his brotker wrote him about the affair, telling him that he had anaes, O'Conor, and to come home and teil the truth, Counsel—There, now, we have it. When you came here from Boston was your name on the trunks? a. I cannot remember, Q. Where was McDonneli put on the trunk? A. I don’t know; my brother put it on;'I was stopping in a hotel at Hoboken three days before the steamer salied; no name was asked; Mr. Gilbert knew I was there; I was not disguised in any way; before Lleft my house I did not send anybody out to re- or any one else? A, | connoitre, but I went out to see my mother, and I assed your house twice that night. (Laughter.) ly mether lives in Fiftieth street, near Madison avenue; J wemt out from the hotel during the day time; no name was given; oh, yes, my brother-in- law, Clapp, took the rooms for me and gave the name ef Clapp. Judge Davis suggested that it was sufficiently . established that the witness went away to evade proceedings against bim. Counsel said he wanted to show that the witness had no complaint against Mr. Tweed except refus- ing to see him, and that it was fears suggested by his own guilty comscience that drove him away; that he carried a large quantity of GOLD AND JEWELRY with him, and showed it on the steamer, and that he instructed his brother to turn his real estate into gold, and that an arrangement was made that he Was to come back and testily in these cases, aud also that he was to be protected. Judge Davis said the flight to evade process, the return and the arrangement under which he came back were sufficiently admitted, and the Court could not sit there to hear it pursued any further. It was so transparent that he would charge the Jury that the evidence has to be viewed as that of @ man who testified under a promise that he would be exonerated from harm. Counsel said he had a right to show that the At- torney General selected the guiltiest man of the lot and promised him @ pardon, without coming here to get the consent of the Court, Judge Davis said the Attorney General had a per- foct right to do so. re Counsel said he could demonstrate to any Court that the Attorney General had no mght to appoit & deputy to make the arrangement. Judge—I cannot allow the subject to proceed further, Was not your wife addressed on the steamer a8 Mrs, McDonnell ? Judge—There you are going into it again. What ossible advantage can there be in going for an ‘our into the ilttie incidents of his Voyage’ He tells you he came back under an arrangement to be used as a witness, WHAT HE HAD AGAINST TWEED. Counsel—I am going to prove that when he came back he said he had nothing against Mr. Tweed, but that Mr. Tweed would not see him, and thus falsify his evidence as to conversations with Mr. Tweed, and to show that his own actions prove him to be the principal actor and that nothing but his own sense of guilt drove him away. Question excluded, Q. How much gold did you take away? A. Sev- enty-five sovereigns, Q. Anything more? A. A thousand pounds in a] T. 2 & Did your wife remove a large quantity of gold ? A. Not a dollar, I swear, a bie you give your brother a power of attorney ? 2 Were not you then the owner of real estate rising a ball a million? A. lt was about that, A. J, GARVEY'S PROPERTY. The witness was then examined as to bonds and mortgages: he had $240,000 standing to his name in bonds and mortgages in 1871; he assigned a fen money to pay his honest debts to the renth National Bamk, but he never assigned any- thing to pay what he owes the oity; the whole con- iMerguen e gave for the real estate he owned In 1871 $602,500; he owned fliteen pieces of real estate ; he did not acquire the principal part of the $502,500 worth of pi rty in 1871, but most was acquired since 1868 inclusive; the mortgage on the propery which he bought amounted to over 192,500; he never heard of any mortgages ex- ecuted on the property since he acquired it, except one of $12,000 on a house on Thirteenth street; Wien he went away in September, 1871, the prop- erty was worth $275,000, clear of mortgages; he North Carolina bonds worth $30,000. in ‘the icin ayo and ist h it United Staves bonds tof 1 @ put United States bonds for $120,000 into the bank, a iy x Q. How much money aid you leave in any bank when you were going away! A. $26,000, Q On the 12th of September, 1871, didn’t qe convey No. 7 East Eleventh street to John H. Har- nett, in trust for your wife? A. I did, and he con- veyed it to her before the ink was dry. And didn’t BA] and your wife invest John " 3 ee of attorney when you were leaving ? “ e . Q. And wasn’t that done on the consideration that von were never to returm? A. No. we ex- ted to return; mY, friends said they would not my battles urtil J went away, A FAMOUS Foun, Q. Who were they? A. Walter Roche came to a oes ee ae were Es t A Mr. Rte weeny, Connolly,’ «1 suppose whole vette, (Laughter, Q Was Mr. Hall Gone“ of ‘tiem? A. He was em- braced in the lot. . How? A. In the public prints, ‘Was he one of tiiose that were to hag oad your battles? A. He would not do anything to injure e. Did you expect: him to fight -your battles for cos AT done know what ‘o tag about it. Q. How much did Foe claim mst the city in 1871? A. There might be $200, all against the city. ns How mach against the county? A. I don’t OW. Q. $120,000? A, I don’t think it was; I can’t re- member, d Do you make these claims now f* I don’t. é 8 Si were they for? A. Partly for work to What was the work done? A. These frescoes. It wasn’t allfor these irescoes, surely? A. It ‘Was also {or work on armories and drif} rooms, MISCELLANKOUS ARMOBIES, What armories? A. Miscellaneous armories. Q. (Lat a4 Judge ‘ere the bills presented? A, They were, o. ‘hat did you claim in September, 1871, alto- ether? A. Without drawbacks? (Laughter) I on’t remember the amount of bills put in. Q. You are not asked that, but how much alto- gether did you claim? .A, How can I tell unless I add one to the other? Counsel—If you want time for reflection, it is now the hour jor recess, and you can take time to reflect. Judge Davis—Very, well; half an hour for reflec- ion. ‘The Court then took a recess, After Recess. The afternoon session of the Court wasextremely ary and tedious, and scarcely an opportunity resented itself for a joke. Mr. Garvey was the rst man in Court on the prosecution + pcre, Davis came in at twenty minutes to two o’clock— ten minutes behind time—and when the counse! for the deience resumed the cross-examination 0! the witness there was not one ‘of the counsel for prosecution in their places. They came in almost immediately afterwards, however. Mr. Garvey, can you now give us any idea of the gross amount of your claims against the city in September, 1871? A. My claims, as presented, real and fictitious, I should judge were over $200,000, What amount of that total was a real claim ? A. Under $100,000, o. How much under $100,000? A. Something like et ea thousand dollars, low much do you claim from the county this day? A. I have done since then about six thuu- sand dollars’ worth of work for the county, and I have a ciaim for that now. Q. In September, 1870, what amount of diamond Jewelry did you present to your wife? What was the value o: HER PARAPHERNALIA in that line? I believe that is what they call it, A. That has been a good deal over-estimated. . Well, never mind that; tell us what it was. A. Well, she had a pair of earrings and a brooch-— The Court—O, you need not give us the items, Mr. Garvey; state the value of them. A, About thirty thousand dollars, Q. Did you have any Tammany Hall bonds in 1870 or 1871? A. Ten bonds, of the total value of $10,000, ). Did Mr. Tweed present you with any articles of silver’, A. Yes, sir. The Court—1 cannot see the relevancy of such fortinony this. What does the counsel expect EGER ounsel—We ask this question to show. the animus of this witness against Mr. Tweed. We ex- pect to show that he destroyed those presents, be- cause they were presented to him by Mr. Tweed, and sold them for old silver, Witness—You can’t show that, for ) have got the “silverware” yet; I wiil bring them into Court ‘aud show them to you to-morrow morning, (Laughter.) RY What articles did he present you with? A. Table silver. & When this agreement that you say was mado with Mr. O’Conor, was entered into was there any provision in it to secure to the county the return’ of any, moncy that you owed it? “. There was nothing said about it at all. Q. Then that agreement was made to extricate you from your troubles? A. I have told you what Was done, and you can MAKE YOUR OWN: SENSE of it; I am wiliing todo what is right. Q. When did you first go before the Grand Jury ? A. October 17, 1871; | waa before the Grand Jury three times; I gave evidence on the 17th and 22d of October; I Bave had conversations with Mr. Peckham, counsel for the prosecution—the first time carly in February last; that was before I had been indicted; he said nothing to me about my being indicted. Q. How oiten have you had conversations with him? A. Perhaps hall a dozen or more. Q. How many more? A, Well, perhaps seven or eight or nine, Q. As many as twelve? A. Perhaps! have had Pomme 1 have seen him atghis house and at bis once. Q. When did you last call on him? fA. Last night; I was with him about twenty-five minutes, <, When last before that? A. On Saturday night, for about five minutes, Q. How often since October last? A. Three or four times; he asked me to come to his house on Saturday night. Q. What did you talk about? Objected to by Mr. Peckham. Objection sustained and exception taken. Q. How often have you seen Mr. fremain pri- vately? A. Not at ail. Q. Do you 1 Nnember that when you were pro- duced in Court, on the Hall trial, that you sprung upon that trial as @ surprise when it was not known that re were in the city? Objected to, overruled and excepted to. Q. Did you keep yourself concealed from the time you came back to the city until you were produced on that trial? A. I don’t know that I did; I went over to Brooklyn several times and went out riding everywhere. A number of questions as to whether the wit- ness knew or believed HIS PRESENCE IN THE CITY was gperay known at that time were overruled. Q Did you bave an interview with Attorney General Barlow? A. I bad but one interview with him; that was at his house; I have furnished sev- eral statements in writing in reference to this matter te the prosecutien; I velunteered those statements. The defence then demanded that the prosecu- tion (or Mr. Peckham) produce these stavements in writing, but the demand was overruled. Q. On January 1, 1868, what was the utmost amount you were worth? A. About one hundred thousand dollars. Q. What did it consist of? A. lowned a house corner of Twenty-ninth street and Third avenue and the house No. 58 Third avenue, with my busi- ness and stock and from ‘$55,000 to $85,000 in regis- tered United ‘states securities. Q. Were they registered in yourown name? A. es. . Did you keep them at home? A, Yes. ‘he Court—Oh, counsellor, I cannot sit here to listen to this. Ishali not allow you to contradict him ts that, and why do you want to occupy the ime Counsel explained that he did not want to occupy the time, but it was necessary, The Court stated that counsel must take witness’ statement that he was worth $100,000, unless he a some object other than mere inquisitive curl osity. Coansel said his object was to learn by compari- son of items whether they tallied with the aggre- gate given. The questions were ruied out and ex- ceptions noted. Q. Did you bring any suit fora claim against the city or county in 1871? A, J did, but hdon’t know Whether it was against the city or county; [ brought a suit also against Mr. Tweed for a claim of a twenty thousand dollars; that has becn settled. Q. Do you remember that it was settled by strik- ing off an item of about two thousand dollars for work claimed to have been done at Greenwich ? A. That Was about the amount left oif; I didn't SETTLE IT MYSELF; ft was done by my brother and a lawyer; I was in Jersey City, at Taylor’s Hotel, when the final set- tlement was made; that was in the latter part of Aart ons year, Q. Were you living in Jersey City under your own name? A. (with snpnene) es, sir; I received these payments in Jersey City; Mr. Edelstein, who sits near you now, made some of the payments. Q. Do you remember telling Mr, Edelstein, “Billy, the old man would not see me alter this trouble began. I went to his office to get advice about & and he would not see me or give me any advice!” A. I may have said something like that. Q. Do you Renee pare) “If the old man would only have seen m@and advised me what to do things would not be to-day as they are?’ A. I don’t remember saying that; 1 don’t remember using those words; I probably said, “I can’t see anyvody to advise with me,” and was in perplex- ity; that was the gist of it except kind expressions 1 used towards Mr. Tweed. Counsel—Ni that MR. TWEED PAID YOU every dollar he ever owed you in the world. Counsel then showed witness two bills, one dated June 13, 1868, the other February 22, 1868. Witness acknowledged the handwriting as his own. The first was for $4,000, and the last for $12,000, These bills are for work done at Greenwich. A WONDERFUL CHECK, Counsel then showed witness two other papers dated poenoenyay September 1, 1869, and October 28, 1860; also 4 check on the Broadway Bank, with the iatier dade, 10" $20,80, payable to Garvey's order, As the witness took the check he looked at it and acknowledged the endorsement on it to be in his own handwriting. He then held it up to the Court, between his thumb and forefinger, and, with evident surprise, said, “This is the first time Lever had this check in my hand.” (Sensation), Q. The first time? A. Yes, sit; I never got a dol- lar of it; that is my endorsement, ‘Tho bills were respectively for $19,750 and $580, for work done on Mr. Tweed’s property, in Duane street, and on his coach house and residence in Fortieth street, and the check drawn by William M. ‘Tweed in favor of Garvey represented both tnese sums, @ Then yon presented that bill for $22,800 ¢ ANOTHER RECEIPT AND CHECK were acknowledged as being in witness’ handwrit- iow, Mr. Garvey, I want to show you | , with the remark, “I d'd@ not nt that re- Bt all; it was’ handed im by Woodward, I think,” ‘The endorsement on the cheek is in your hand- weltings rier A. | endorsed it for Woodward. The Fecelpt Was dated November 30, 1871, for $2280; and the chock ior $22,510 December 4, isi. Barer other papers representing various smaller i. ts were aiso ic ited, identified aud pre @mid several short discussions as SET ct 6 wine bo he would show by these that in. erate. ar Where Mr. Tweeu bad. trans. actions with Mr. Garvey for work doné by him for Mr. Tweed Tweed hoida his (Garvey s) receipts, amonntng. 12, $147,000, and all paid out of Tweed’s own poc! Anovher paper, identified witness as in his own handwriting was dated rack a 1, 1870, was @ Dill for work done by Mr. Garvey on Mr, Tweed’s ropel at Greenwich from September, 1869, to November, 1870, and was for $60, 4%: Admitted ag evidence. Q When you appeared before the Grand Jury ‘DID YOU SWEAR that you never Mr. Tweed @ centin your life, nor promised him a cent, nor received a cent from him improperly? A. I aia not; 1 do not recollect @ grand juror ever asking me any such question, but it might have been asked. What answer did you make if you were asked such a question? The Court ruled out the question as “involving en absurdity,” and counsel sent off for a volume of New York Reports to show that the Court of Appeals snstained such an “absuraity.”” Q. In relation to these seven warrants that you have testified about. I understard the principal object invelved was the erection of @ house for Comptrolier Connolly, and I understood you to say that out of those warrants you received something like i 10,000 for your part of the work to be done about that house. Have you ever returned that $119,000? A. No, sir. DICK CONNOLLY AGAIN, . Q. Did you bd peri against Connolly within ®& year past for this amount? A. luever heard of such @ snitand never brought it. Why, sir, you peerereh laim bes acd Inst. Cr ly las uny claim been made st, Conno) acy tir, te a little over $100,000 for work aud Materials on that nouse; I have been me $62,000 on account of that; 1 received $37, cash in one cheek, or rather Mr. Connolly and inyself e: changed checks for that amount, in, 1871; 1 ceived tn all $52,820 14, in various sums in 1871; the claim was sentin by my brother while I was away, The witness went on to state in explanation of his position quite a lengthy rigmarole, aud counsel suggested that “a Vhiladelphia lawyer be tele- graphed for to take care o! this witness.” ‘The Court—Don’t bother with Philadelphia law- yers. We have lawyers enongh here already. (Laughter. The hit was felt.) Q. Was there not a payment of $40,576 12 allowed on account. of your claim, the claim being actually made ip 1870? A, There was. explanation, The witness then made a lengt from which ft appeared that his brother, Join Garvey, had transacted nearly it not the whole of this business, and that his information on the sub- Ject was chiefly gleaned from whut bis brother had written and told him. The explanation was not allowed as evidence, everythin ing stricken out except such parts as modified the witness’ pre- MyLe Seed e he Closed the day's:proceedings, and the cross- examination will be resumed this morning. THE JUMEL ESTATE CASE. co The Suit of George Washington Bowen va. Nelson Chase—Depositions and Rul- ings—Further Testimony for the Defens dant—The Plaintiffs Arrangements for the Prosecution of His Suit. The further hearing, of the case of George Wash- ington Bowen vs. Nelson Chase was resumed yes" terday in the United States Circuit Court,. before Judge Shipman anda Special Jury. ‘Mr. Hoar, Mr. Chatfield and Mr. Shaffer appeared 98,counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr. Charles 0’Conor and Mr. J. C. Carter for the defendant. The plaintiff had taken thé deposition of Joseph Perry ex parte and without notice to the delen- dant, and * Mr. Charles O’Conor made an application to the Court that he should now be at liberty to read this deposition or such portion of it aa he deemeq proper, Mr. Chatfield and Mr. Hoar objected to this pro- posal on the ground that though they had taken the deposition they haa not read it in evidence, The Court ruled that, in the present stage of the case, he did not deem it necessary to let the de- position be read. c Mr. Hoar then applied to the (ourt that the plaintift’s Counsel have liberty to inspect the books and papers produced in evidence on Friday (the books and papers containing entries by the apothecary, at Providence, who sold medicines to Polly and Betsy Bowen, daughters of Caleb Bowen.) Mr. O’Conor said Mr. Hoar was at perfect liberty to examine the books in court, or, if Mr. Hoar desired it, he would meet him at any place he named and examine the books with himfrom beginning to end. . . O’Conor then read to the jury passages from the deposition of George W. Bowen, the platntir. In this deposition Bowen stated that he never told his first wile that Madame Jumel was his mother; that he never saw his father to his knowl- edge; and that he never knew who his lather was, Mr. O’Conor was proceeding to read a passage to the effect that the plaintiff had made a bargain with Judge Edmonds to carry on the suit for him, when Mr. Hoar interposed an objection, but the Court overruled it. The plammtit gave Judge Ed- monds a retaining fee of $500, and had a written agreement with Edmonds and Fields that he was to give them half of what they re- covered. This bargain was given up. He further stated that he had no _ agree- ment with Mr. Shaffer or Mr. Tucker as to dividing the profits of this case; but he had not advanced any money to conduct this suit. He had an agree- ment with two gentlemen to pay all the costs of this suit. He declined, by the advice of his coun- sel, to state the names ofthese gentiemen. He further declined to state whether he had entered into an @ ment with Aune Eliza Vandervoort that she should have a share of what might be derived from this case. Mr. O'Conor sald he proposed to read the depo- sition of Perry taken en the last trial, and to show that it was a tiasue of falsehoods and perjurics from beginning to end; and, further, he would say that any coungel of ordinary intelligence and com- mon gense ought to have seen that it was a tissue ef falsehoods and perjuries. Mr. Chatfleld did not think there was any object in_this but to get up a@ laise issue. Mr. O’Conor said there was no desire to get up a false issue ; bat he wanted to show that this was a conspiracy to suborn perjured witnesses, ana it was in the recollection of the Court that they had spent a week in the last trial in examining seventeen witnesses to rebut the testimony of Joseph Perry. There was an intimation from counsel for plaintif® that possibly the evidence of Perry would not be reliod upow: but it was not until the case had closed and the final argument was addressed to the jury that the plaintiff's counsel said they aban- doned Perry’s testimony, and then there was no opportunity for the defendant to answer that state- ment. Mr. Chatfield replied that they had reason to be- lieve that Perry was imposed on them by the de- fendant, or by some one acting in the interest of the deiendant. He admitted that Perry’s evidence was faise, and that they had made an effort to have him punished for it, but up to the present they had been unsuccessiul in that object. Mr. O’Conor challenged the fullest inquiry on this question, and denied that the defendant had any- thing whatever to do with the productior of Perry. Bowen, the plaintiff, was he to the stand, and he authenticated the story he gave, adaing that he had kuown Perry in early youth. Aiter tire defend- ant’s witnesses had been examined as to the per- pred nature of Perry's evidence, Bowen was called ack to the stand, but he failed to account for the statements he had made in relation to Perry. He would also read jrom the depositions of Bowen. Judge Shipman said there was no doubt that it was conceded at the last trial that Perry had given talse testimony. He was called as a witness for the laintif. He had stated on the trial that he was horn in Providence, between 1790 and 1800, an: that le had resided there for some years, a knew George W. Bowen. Evidence for the de- fendant brought out the fact that this man Perry was born at Woodstock, Conn, about the year 1809; that he. went from there to Boston. Now, one of three things must be true—either that the laintif corruptly procured. the attendance of Perry, and secured his testimony, or that he was palmed off by the defendant on the plaintiff, or that he had made himself up in the case and had come forward malicionsly to give the statements he made upon the last trial. It was not for the Court Lo assume what the fact was; but he would admit the evidence. Mr. O’Conor. then Broveedad, to read the deposi- tions in question for the purpose of showing, as he claimed, that there was not a word of truth in the story of Perry, and that Bowen had sworn falsely in een le 0 Perry’s testimony. The deposition of Bowen er stated that he (Bowen) had not employed any lawyers at all. He made an agree- ment about the prosecation of this case with Dr. Joseph €. Tucker in the office of his brother, Mr. Gideon J. Tucker, in New York. Dr. J. 0. Tucker resides in California, Bowen states that he hired no lawyers at all, It was Mr. Tucker’s business to hire and pay the lawyers. Bowen made @ bargain with two persons, and one backed out. The person who backed out was Mr. George Shaffer, brother of Mr, Chauncey Shafer. Mr. C. Shaffer—The first of the family that ever backed out. (Laughter). The deposition wey on to state that after one man backed out Bowen made another agreement with Dr. Tucker; that was made in New York, at the office of Mr, Gideon J, Tucker, brother of Dr. Tucker. The agreement Bowen had with Tucker and Shaffer waa that he was to give them ten por cent of all the money they collected and to pa; back all money laid out as expenses, with interest on disbursements. Bowen was to pay the cost of taking the depositions in Rhode Island, and did pay $600 Oa One Occasion for that purpose, Connsel continued to read fromthe depositions Fenewed his motion tohave the recognizance for- et consideravle length, ¢ Case Was adjourned until this morning. uo | . BUSINESS IN THE OTHER COURTS. SUPERIOR COURT—SPECIAL TERM. By Juage Barbour. Turner ys, Dion,—Motion granted, Wolt vs, Jacobs.—Same. Weiss vs, Weigs,—Order granted. Horton va. Moore.—Same. Grady vs. Todd.—Same. PY Cammeyer va. Hauilton.—Same, Hornstein vs, Frost.—Motion denied. Bradiey vs. the Narragansett Steamship Com- pany.—Demurrer allowed. COURT OF CO MON PLEAS—TRIAL TERM. The Value of Brooklyn City Railroad Bonds. Before Judge Robinson. P In 1867 Thomas Keech sold to William Johnson a house on Thirty-fourth street, near Tenth avenue. ‘There was a mortgage for $10,000 on the property at the time, Mr. Johnson assumed this mot re. and gave $2,500 in cash and $9,500 bonds of the Metropolitan Railroad Company ‘of Brooklyn in payment tor the property. Jt was claimed by Mr. eech that the bonds were popresented to him as being ag as government bonds, On the part of Mr, Johnson it was claimed that the bonds were only put in for their value at the time, which was alieged to be gents on the dollar. Mr. Keech brought suit to recover their par Value, The trial, which lasted three days, was concluded yesterday, and resulted in a verdiet.{for the defendants Camp- bell’ & Bell for plaintiff; F. R, Coudert and Matthew Daly for defendant. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS—SPECIAL TERM. Decisions. By Judge Loew. Irwin vs, Field,—Motion granted, Wendel ys, Stachier.—Motion for amended return granted, Worster va, The Forty-second street and Grand street Ferry Railroad Company.—Motion to strike out certain portions of the complaintias irrelevant and redundant granted. | McKay vs. McKay.—Judgment of divorce granted. Keyser vs. Sherlock,—Motion denied, Deacon ys. Luwenthal.—Motion granted, Stevens vs. Hastings.—Same, MARINE COURT—PART I. Suit Improperly Brought in the Name ofa Partner of a Firm. Betore Judge Spaulding. Lazarus Blout vs. Felix Marx.—Defendant keeps @cosher restaurant in this city, where the food is prepared in accordance with the Jewish faith, In February, 1870, plaintiff entered into copartnership. with one David Minzeshetmer for the purpose of opening, @ similar restaurant within two blocks of defendant's piace of business, They socordingty leased the ‘premises for one year She Ist 0: March, at the rate of $300 per month, aud carpenters, masons and Padua to tit up the place tor their business. ntiff alleges that the defendant sought out each and every, one of the. mechanics ‘engaged’ do ‘the work aud told them to have no! to do with plaingia. _ or. his, partier; iat they were windléis dnd cheats, and’ only desired’ to have a ne, elegant restaurant titted up in order to trans- fer it to other parties, and thus ‘cheat the me- chanics and taborers; that by muking these state- ments the mechanics were induced to withdraw from the work, and plaintiff And his partner were piayented from ‘opening aud carrying op; their business for a period ot three or four weeks beyond the designed time during the busiest season o/ the | year, and plaintitr brings this sult to recover. damages for tne loss which he sustained. It ap- tr from the evidence that the pitintif’ and inzesheimer are etill in partnership, and the Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that. the loss, i any, Was 8 stained by the firm, aud that @ suit to recover for damages can be brought only Mu the name of the firm, COURT CALENDARS—THIS DAY. Surreme Court--Circcir—TriaL TeErm—Part 1— Held by Judge Fancher.—Nos. 1281. 483, 62134, 609, 765, 1921, 871.44, A874, 675, 74%, 813. 830, 841, 845, 851, £61, S(& S67, 8 6. Part2—l'e d by Jadce Van Brant.— Nos. & si, S803g, 044, 1842, 165, O80, 1442, 116, 180,, 440, 664 4g, 746, 818, 820, B24, iE 886, 828, 840, SUPKEME COURT—GENERAL TERM—Held by Judges Ingraham, Brady and Learned.—Nos, 1 ‘170, 172, 178, 180, 182, 183, 185, 187, at 188, 189, 191, 87, 192, 193, 194, 196, 196, 197, 198,'190, 200, 201, 202, i SUPREME COURT—CHAMBERS—Held by Judge Bar~ rett.. hoe 7, 50, 51, 68, 88, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, 1023;. Cail, 107. SvrERIOR COURT—TRIAL TERM—Part 1--Held by Jndge Curtis,—Adjourned to Wednesday, January 22, 1873. Part 2—Held by Judge Friedman.—Nos, 1456, 1458, 112, 2020, 1512, 540, 1358, 404, 1506, 1140, 804, 1864, 370, 1572, 1574. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS—TRIAL TERM—Part.1— Held by Judge Robinson.—Nos. 1542, 1695, ‘1606, 2700, 129, 112444, 866, 59, 1360, 65, 1698, 1051, 1150, 874, 2495, 1721, 763, 508, 2807, 1247, 1854, 1303, 1685, 512, 1649, 612, 613, 1618, 1092, 1644, 511, 3044, 70, 50, 170, 164. MARINE Court—TrraL TeRM—Part 3—Held by Iudye JoMchimsen.—Nos, 1694, 1717, 1059, 1060, 1063, 1065, 1067, 1286, 1336, 1667, 1670, 1671, 1679, 1680, 1681, Part Hela by Judge Spaulding.—Nos. 636, 1250, 1265, 1208, 1070, 1104, 1288, 1124, 1192, 1204, 434, 1208, 1254, 122,'1304.' Part 2—Held by Judge Gtoss.—Nos. 1307, 1637, 1433, 1317, 1361, 1379, 1555, 685, 1201, 1105, 1103) 1443, 1445, 1447, 1449: BROOKLYN COURTS. COURT OF OYER AND TERMINER. Second Trial of the Alleged Murderess Fanny Hyde—The Accused Not Present and Hor Kecognizance Forfeited—The “Unpleasantness” Between District At- torney Britton and Ex-Judge Morris—A Tilt in Court—The Court Desires a Mo- tion to Postpone—A Doctrine Not To Be Tolerated. Before Judge Gilbert and Associate Justices Jonn- son and Stilwell, The Oyer and Terminer court room was crowded yesterday morning, \t having been previously an- nounced that Mrs. Fanny Hyde would be again placed on trial for the murder of George W. Wat- son, her employer and alleged seducer, on the 26th of January last. Mrs. Hyde was not present, but her counsel, ex-Judge Morris, General Catlin and P. Keady, appeared and opposed District Attorney Britton’s motion that the second trial of the case should at once be preceeded with, The Clerk called the defendant three times, but of course there was no response. District Attorney Britton immediately moved for the forieiture of her recognizance, which is $2,500. Ex-Judge Morris, in support of his mote for @ postponement, submitted an afidavit made By him- self, which is given below :— (ity of Brooklyn, Kings: County, s.:—8. D. Morris, being auig’ovorn ‘aya that he {sone of the counsel ror Fann: Hyde, who stands indicted tor the homicide of Mr. Wai son; that she was confined in prison from the 26th day of January, 87d, until the 16th day of April last, whan she ‘was brought to trial upon said indictment, which trial occupied a week, and the jury failing to agree upon a verdict were discharged; that it is conceded the jury stood ten tor an absolute acquittal and two for conviction the third degree, the jury being dis- jay; the following morning she was ad- sum of $2,500; that OT ATTORNEY, BECOMING OFFENDED AT DEPONENT, ordered, as deponent formed and believes, all parties for whom deponent has appeared to be immediately notified to be ready jor trial at the fellowing term, in- cluding Fanny Hyde; that re the Court me! Di trict Attorney, had Fecovered trom his pet, and it was understood between him and deponent that the case was not to be tried, but that to make the District Attorney ear consistent 1 pe ged was to make a formal m fo have the case put off, which was done, the District At- torney making only # pretended opposition; that the Distrfet Attorney has caused to be published As pamphies fori the proceedings had on the sormer Ui it for & Tong time deponent declined to let bim bi the steno- graphic report ot deponents address to the jury in that regardi the case published finally disposed of, and ao stated to the District At- torney; that from what the District Attorney then sald doporient supposed that the District Attorney had made up his mind to ABANDON THE PROSECUTION, and deponent then delivered to him such report; that from that day to this the District Attorney has never in- timated, directly or indirectly, that he ever 4 move the case agnin—in tuct, he never subject; that during all this tine he has prdtende on iriendly terms with deponent, and # part of the time deponent ‘has acted as his counsel; that on the December last deponent, having made up his mind to withdraw as his counsel, wrote lim a letter, stating some of the reasons waty he could not longer act in that capa- city. A few days atter deponent sent this letter he re- celved notice, in all cases in which he appeared, to be ready tor trial at the term then being holden, and among them was the case of Led Hyde, and also a cripple named Monahan, charged with voting twice at the same polls. And corer’ charges that the District Attorney In this matter ACTUATED SOLELY NY 1118 PERSONAL FEELINGS and not by a sense of ( Deponent further says that John Dexter and Mary Dexter of John Windley, are necessa ‘on behalf or said nny ilyd ean prove by them and eac sacy In her defense; that deponent speaks roay ledge as to the fucts that can be prow wars by the affidavit of said Winuiey, for Furope betore the case Was notice for trial. onent further says that General L 8. Ca’ lin 18 associated as counsel with deponent in said case; that for a long time past, as deponent is informed, Gen: gral Catlin is been confined to his house and is now wi unabie nter vpon such & 5 ~ geo neidBinant 8. D. MORRIS, An aMdavit of John Windiey, the father of Fanny Hyde, certiying to the departure for Kurope of the parties above alluded to, was also submitted, and then Ex-Judge Morria said that he had only received notice to be ready for trial after the term bad com- mended, on the 7th inst. District Attorney Britton had no answer to make to a motion to postpone uniess the defend- ant were present, He said the case might be put om for the next five years on account of the ab- sence Of these witnesses, a8 it had been belore, He reierred to in the amidavit theNa; thi they hav | Judge Gilbert remarked that it i a was not abso- tely thé defendant s1 peers on @ motion to pospone, but te ala not hink that the motion was au answer to a motion to have the recognizance forteited, ina vy speech of Counsellor Morris which followed he declared it to be the aut of the Court to interfere and protect the rights of the defendant, as the District Attorney was actuated by A PERSONAL FEELING in making the motion, It was not made in the due administration of justice. District Attorney Britton “eee that he did not feel called upon to answer such a harangue, but he Would say that he had never given counsel to un- derstand anything other than he intended to try Segee again. He thought it a proper case totry Judge Gilbert decided that there was no suMicient eXcuse presented why the recognizance should not be fortelted. He said that it was A DOCTRINE NOT TO BE TOLERATED, that because of a disagreement of a jury @ person accused of crime should not be retried. It was in the discretion of the District Attorney to notice the case for trial. This case was postponed in Oc- tober last, and two terms had passed since then. Two weeks’ notice had been given to the counsel, and that was sufficient to enable her to be present. Judge Gilbert said further that there was no obliga- tion-on the District Attorney's part to intimate that he was or was not going to try the case again. The motion to poarpone was denied, and the me- tion to forfeit the recognizance granted, MORRIS’ PERSONAL INTEREST. ExJudge Morris said there another reason ere he opposed the motion, wi he hat not stated, and that was that he was the indem- nitor of the sureties on the recognizance. | Judge Gilbert smiled, and remarked that’ he should have considered that be‘ore he went.on, * Ex-Judge Morris retired discomfited, but 2 returned to the bar and excitedly asked that a day. ‘be fixed ‘for the second trial of Dr. Irish., ‘The de- fence would be ready to-day. ., Judge Gilbert sald that was a matter within the discretion of the District Attorney. Mr. Britton said. that when he noticed that casa and. sPeeaptlomat, was ready, he supposed they. The clerk dismissed the witnesses until further notice, and all parties then left the court room. CITY COURT—SPECIAL TERM. Ex-Mayor Brush’s Son as Defendant in a Divorce Suit, Before Judge Neilson, Mrs. Mary Brush brought an action some time since for an absolute divorce, on the ground of adultery, from her husband, Dr, Francis V, Brash, a gon of the late ex-Mayor Brush. The couple were married in March, 1865, and have three children.. ‘The case was sent to a referee, before wi ‘testi- mony was introduced showing thatthe defendant had been guilty of: infidelity at the Brandreth House in New York, Dr. Brush preferred a counter charge of adultery against his wife, but there .was no testimony produced to establish the charge. It also appeared tne Doctor was -entitied to $1,760 per anni under the provisions of ‘his father's will, Yesterday the referee reported im favor of grant. ing the divorce and $24 a week alimony, COURT OF APPEALS CALENDAR, ° ALBANY, N. Y., Jan, 20, 1873. The following is the calendar of the Court of Ap» peals for January 21:—Nos, 2, 3, 5, 6,8, 9, 14, MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS. BOARD OF ASSISTANT ALDERMEN, jy A meeting of the Board of Assistant Aldermen ‘was held yesterday, President Wade in the chair. ‘The business was of a very routine character, and consisted matnly of the consideration of “general orders,’ The Koard adjourned until Monday next. REASSIGNMENT OF THE CITY HALL ROOMS, It will probably be remembered by our readers that the last Common Council appointed a commit- tee to consider the desirabjlity of reassigning tho roomsof the City Hall, with a view of concentra all the city offices in that palldlae and more espe- cially for the accommodation of the Department of Public Works, In furtherance of this object, the joint committee appointed by the present Common Council have held several meetings, and the follow- ing ate the recommendations tobe sapmitted to the Board of Aldermen ut their meeting on Thurs- day next:— he small room on the southeast corner of the City Hall Building to be added to the City ‘Library. ‘The room on the northwest corner, formerly occu- pied by the Commissioner of Assessments was set apart fer the use of the Naturalization Clerk, the room now used by the latter to be given to-the use of the Commissioner of Jurors; the room occupied by the Commissioner of Jurors to be added to the Governor’s Room; the rooms occupied by the Keeper were ordered to be given up for the use of the Board of Assistant Aldermen; the rooms occu- pied at present by the Clerk of the Board of Assist- apt Aldermen, the Coroners, James O’Brien and the Collector of Assessments to be vacated, to pro- ae suitable room for the Department of Public orks. THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. The renovation of the rooms of the Mayor’s office is progressing with as much despatch as tho weather will permit. The painters are giving the cornices @ new coat of white faint, and ina few weeks the Mayor's rooms will return to the pris- thine condition of former days, Mayor Heseares is still honored day after day with calls from dis- tinguished visitors. Among those more distin- guished who called yesterday were General Sharpe, of Kansas; Thuriow Weed and General Storms. ‘The latter gentleman reminded the Mayor that he was present at the laying of the corner stone of the City Hall, being commander Of the military at that time, and was well acquainted with Mayor Haves meyer’s father. GITY FINANCE. The Comptroller Asks the Mayor fox Legislation to Reduce the Taxation of 1873—A Little Item of $6,000,000 That the State Wants—The Fourth Avenue Improvement Bonds. The following letter was yesterday sent to Mayo. Havemeyer:— Crry or New Yorx, Daranruent or Frvance; Comprnouiin’s Orrice, Jan, 18, 1573, Hon. W, F. Havemxven, Mayor :>— Sun-—To insure a reduction of, taxes in 1873 I. suggested in a communication of the 6th inst. the necewity of ‘ompt legislation. Pav you allow me again to press, this, most, Important subject upon your attention with the view of obtainin; fninediato action, “The ordinary expensds of the govern: ment for 1872 were less than those ot 1871 by upwards of eight and‘a half millions of dollars. I am anxious that tue taxpayers should have the benef of a further reduc- tion in. ‘One item of the taxes of mounting to $9,664,397 consists of the city’s propor of deficiencies create by a misuse, by the Staie authorities, of about six and a half million‘dollars belonging to the State sinking tunas. ‘An act Was passed in 1872 to submit to the people, as required by the constitution, the question whether the whole of this deficit of six anda half millfons should be paid by the issue of State bonds. The State Comp- trolier decides, however, that it must be raised by tax, Decause such submission is unconstitutional, for reasons which existed last year, but do not exist this year. The raising of the means to make up this deficiency on the State tunds, of which this elty has to do its share, is in ‘no proper sense an expenditure of 1873, and should not be chargeable on that year. I propose, therefore— Firat—That this city’s portion of the tax required to sup- Ply this State deficiency be raised by bonds of the city, Payable in not exceeding two years in equal amoantd vor instalments, and that the city bé reimbursed out of o jb the procecds of State bonds to be issued for the purpose; and that the necessary legislation, be Immediately Initiated to accomplish these ends. The law might ds made general to cover ail of the counties of the Stato that desire to avail of its provisions, ‘Second—That' tor the purpose of reducing the taxcs of this year the necessary legisiation be had to authorize the transter of all unexpended balances of last ye The necessity of such legislation is illustrated by the fact that one of the departments, in a statement lately ublished, claims that there ig @bulance unexpended of 9,260 96 of Money provided for its current expenses for the Year 1872 This umount of money, more than was nec- essary for iteexpenses, was raived by taxation at the cost of the interest. In addition to this the demands of the same department, for money for expenses of 1872 were reduced by the Board of Apportionment in the sum of $562,107, showing that more than a million of dollars wi asked for by that department Leyond its reasonable ne cemities, i Third—That the raising in 1873 of $1,598,000 for the Fourth avenue improvement be postponed until 1874 or ay needed. There is now more a million and a hate | the Treasury for this purpose raised in 1872, which will probably suttice to carry the work through L Fourth—That the a, propriations jor carrying on the gov- ernment for 1873 be re-examine! and refixed without delay hogy departments compelled to reduce expenses accordinely. red a dtatt of a bill to accomplish the ob- jects above specified and respectfully ask, rovisiong Teet your approval, {t be transinitted to ature fig early as you may decm practicable, far the reduction of expenses should commence at once and not be leit until s quarter of the Year as passed. 4 ‘i f the authority is given to carry out suggestions $6,500,000 in the taxation Ue about 2.61 per cent on the gainst we rate of 3349 per cent of actual e: . You will observe that this communication relates to the current ses Of government, and ress of the grea’ ment or adornment of the A Li ward under & wise and liberal direction, stimulated by the influence of that ealightened reform which inflexibiy ts should be so applied joilar expended. ¢ the honor two be, with great re: ch ANDREW H. GREEN, Comptroller. A BOGUS HEALTH OFFICER, Edward Graff, a respectable-appearing individual, was brought up at the Jefferson Market Polico Court yesterday, charged with indecent assauit. The evidence showed that the prisoner entered tha ae 143 West Twenty-eighth street, and meet+ ing @ young girlin the hall, named Eliza Pitt, ins formed her that he had beea commissioned by tha Board of Health to examine all full-grown females, and commenced an assault upon ber. She rad away, and he then entered the apartment of Mrs. Elizabeth Allison and treated her in the same man ner, This lady, who ts something over six fect high and correspondingly strong, seized him and detained him until an officer could be Tus He was committed for trial in default of $1,000 baby