New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-02-27
TIE BROADWAY WIDENING.
HOW DISTRICT ATTORNEY GhRYIN DIDN'T
BRING THE CASE BEFORE THE JURY--FAIL-
URE OF THE INVESTIGATION.

HOW DISTRICT ATTORNEY GARyGN DIDN'T
BRING THE CASE BEFORE THE JURY-FAlL-
IRE OF THE INVESTIGATION.
Much surprise ia expressed by actual tax
payers that the investigation OF the swndes connected
with the Broadway widening suddenly di.con-
tnued y the late Grand Jury OF the Court Of Over and
Terminer They are acquainted, however with the
causes that led TO that result II seems that when the
first stem was taken FOR an investigation Of the svnde
District Attorney Garyn, who ia also leading Tam
many politician acted very alphabetically. The formal
complaint had been made and he had been furnished
with the names of several persons who, II was vigil
known could impart to the jury lucid explanation Of
the manner in which the whole affair had been con-
Quoted Instead. however, Of promptly proceeding as
an officer jealous for the public welfare, he exhibited
an OMNIBUS inactivity. At length. one OF THO
Jurors who felt il his duty 10 sustain pubic morality By
urging that tho Investigation proceed, inquired Of the
District Attorney if nc had given the complaint that
serious consideration which its importance nered and
o,os he had been furnished The District Attorney re.
Piled that the complaint not sufficiently solid for
him to proceed upon. This inactivity was hghy graf
fying the Tammany politicians They knew that the
rv woud soon get tired their labors and that tho
Investigation, therefore, would not proceed faf en0gh
for the discovery Of proof sufficient 70 base al fic
The Juror who had attempted to discover the District
Attorneys Interior purpose subsequently had the COM
plant made more exact. 1t was supposed that when
the strctAttorney took this time he would see that
he could wisely delay the Investigation any longer
what ne PROPOSED tO DO he declared that the complaint
must directly charge that clearly unlawful act
had been committed and that person had done tina
deed The official conduct OF Commissioners Cornell and
Hennessy was then complained of, and the DisrictAt
tOrney after delaying little lsnger had the witnesses
subpenaed. Meanwhile, nearly two weeks had passed
the first step for the Investigation had been taen
and at iuncture the conduct OF the District t0rney
was irritating that OF the jurors threatened D.
peal personally to the Court 10 make bin
cease his prOcrastinatiOn, whereupOn De deiantly
exclaimed: "GO! aud what you
do there" The Jury the Tammany politicians
expected quite weared They made fual attempt how
ever to get at the truth The first witness waA COcc
tor Murphy part Of his testimony showed THAI Geo
H. Purcer could enigheH the Jury and produce import
ant official records because he the Clerk OF the Com
nilsson Now bogana lively strategic outside movement
to keep PuTcers testimony away Purcer now and hss
BEEN from time 10 time during the LASS three years. the
Clerk Of many similar Commissions through tho lnstru
mentality " which the leading Tammany politicians ana
hundreds Of their subOrdnaes have suddenybecone rich
After Collector Murphy instead OF Purcer camo Connolly
and Peter b. Sweeny, who created diversion by some
carefully studied expressions about taxation. While they
testfying Garyn acted more their counsel IA
said than public prosecutor The result OF the Dis
tTct Attorneys course that the jurors saw thar nDh
ing which would sfiJrd them clear insight into the
manner In which the proceedings for the widening had
been conducted would como before them, and therefore
of their number moved that the complaint I've laid On
the table, and another that II be dismissed The latter
motion prevailed and the jurors gladly proceeded into
Court and were discharged.