New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1866-05-22
TUESDAY MORNING, MAY %, 1866.

responsible citizens, until the organization Of tn
police was effected. When the order was issue
the police were completely disorganized.
! Question By Mr. MoOre-For what reason wer
| they dsOrganized?
A1lS,0er-E suppose from their previous conduc
they expected to be discharged.
| Direct res1tmed-Ihe police were not adequat
to the protection Of life and property in the city
at that time so stated to this board at the time
in my official capacity, as its presiding officer.
| QueStion-WeFe not disorder and crime common
then?
Mr.. Lynch objected to this question. Disorde
and crime existed at all times in large cities
Murders and robberies had been committed sontin
ually in this city and would doubtless contnae tt
be committed. But that fact had nothing to DE-
with this case.
Mr. Conway thought the question pertinent tc
the case. The chief was arraigued for issuing
certain order, and he proposed to justify excuse
the order by showing that the condition of the
city was such as to demand an extraordinary
measure. The evidence was relevant ard ought
to be admitted
Mr.. Duyignaud thought all such testimony ire
leVant
Judge Walker urged that the condition of the
city and of the police were properly matters OF
consideration in this connection. 1t was surely
relevant to prove that great public disorder existed
and that the police were Inefficient The right Of
self defense is inherent. 1t is a national right to
which written law must yield when they conflict.
The security CT the life and property of the citizen
is the end and aim of government.
Examination in chief C0ntinued-The first
batch of police appointments under the new or
ganzation of the city government was made on
the 8th, 9th and 10th Of May. was then occupied
aiF1 ba
police suggested to me the propriety of revolving
the first order. instructed aim to do So and this
| order was accordingly issued.
| AA LieutenGnts Of Police-My order of April
23th, concerning arrests for carrying concealed
weapons" is hereby revoked. shall expect the
| newly appointed police to afford such protection
to citizens as will give them no excuse for carving
THos E ADAMS, Chief of Police. .
! informed this board the Iasf time presided
that had directed the first order 10 be issued The
! subject was brought up by Mr.. s0uie, who men
| toned the indictment, and asked ne ii had heard
| Of it. ! told hin had, but that t looked to me
| like political movement on the er of the parish
| election. then explained the Whole matter to
| the board as have now eEp)aiRedit. The order
| had no reference to the electinnPr Or to political
! parties, for every one was allowed tie same priyi-
| ege, without reference TO party.
Mr.. Lynch objected to this part Of tlp testimony.
The order spoke for itself procaimedts purpose
Judge Walker said there was stronl presump-
tion that there was a strong political bias in this
matter, and he wished all the facts tdappear Of
record,
lrr. Lynch replied that it had nothing do with
the case, except to justify Mr. Clark. If he
wished it, let it be taken down.
Examination resuned-I told Mfr. Sout at the
time, that if anybody should be indicted it vas me
TOR the chief only acted under my instructions and
orders.
The secretary was directed now to read til evi
lence Of Mr.. Clark, which he aid, partially and
it was discovered that the testimony was recodad
50 very imperlecty, if not untatelligioly, thathc
board requested Mr.. Clarke to write out his wi
dence himself, which he proceeded to do.
Meantime, Lieutenant Manning, of the First D
trict police, was sworn as a witness for the d
fcnse, and the following question pvt to him.
QaeStt0ia-Was there any distinction made, p
f litlGay in the execution of the order Of TIE 25
Of April?
Mr.. Lynch objected to the testimony. Thel
was no allegation of partially. The order itse
= defined the character of persons who were to |
exempted from arrest.
Judge Walker suggested as reason for goir
into this question, that the notification from ii
board spoke Of certain persons " having bet
allowed to carry weapons, and his object was
show that there was no political preference in tt
execution of the order. -..
> Mr.. Lynch replied that no improprety w
i charged, subsequent to the issuing of the orde
against Mr.. Adams. ..r ...-
Judge Walker wished to show that the chi
made no distinction between responsible, and VT
behaved citizens.
The board informally expressed the opinit
~ Al. T;n-
Manning retired.
:, Mr.. Clark having written his testimony on
= further interrogatoriCs were put to him. as follow
In anstoel' to Mr.. Mo0re-L was aware of IL
fact that the order was in violation of law, but
that time there was no protection to life OR pr
). perty from the law.
Y Mr. Moore said that from the remarks of cou
Il sci, there was seemingly disposition to give
= slight political turn to this matter. Perhaps Il
:. less said about that the better. So far as he kne
|. no political feeling influenced the board.
Judge Walker did not, he said, impute polite
If bias to the board, but had reference to the pub
political feeling.
/ Mr. Moore said gross violation of law had be
, brought to the attention of the board. The act
" mayor had acknowledged the order was in vio
y ton of law, and it was to be presumed that t
e chief knew it was illegal.
u u The examination of Mr.. Clark was again
d sumed:
% Examined By Mr.. DuUignaud-The police
the time this order was issued, on the 28th Apr
e was supposed to be about 480 strong. | had,
k the time, command of the police force, but euu
h not control them. | could remove any one at W
and put another in his place, but l was not th
prepared to do so. | did, however, remove
great many but did not fill their places until late
D. I had, at that time, a great many applications
j positions in the police, and had issued an order
" proclamation for applications for police appon
J. ments after the lst May. | was appointed may
e pro tenn on the 20jh March.
QueSti0n-Coud you not, with the laws in 20
II hands, prevent disorder or bloodshcd without a
~ thori2ng the carrying of concealed weapons?
o AnS1ger-I answer emphatcally, no; nor cou
m any other man with that police.
Is Question by Mr.. Lynch--Who are the perso
who are in the habit of carrying conceal
t weapons? Are they, or are they not, general
laWless and dis0rderly persons?
AnSioe7'r-Yes; it is lawess and disOrderly pl
sons who are in the habit Of carrying conceal
r. weapons and for that reason the order was ISSUE
is as the police were no protection, and respeetat
and reputable persons were in danger of theirSiy
Il and at the mercy of those armed lawless and d
) orderly persons.
if Question By Mr.. Lynch-For whose beue
d would the immunity flom arrest resulting fri
the order Of the chief of police authorizing the c.
rying of concealed weapons rebound?
70 AnslDer'-pO the benefit of the respectable p
ton of the community, whose avocatons kt