New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-12
TIE ACCUSED DETECTIVES.

DISCRIMINATION OF IRVING AND FARLEY-ARGU-
MFNT OF MR. HLL-CoL. HAsTINGss REPLY.
The investigation of the charges against
Capt Irving and Detective Farley was resumed yester
day morning at Police Headquarters, Commissioner
Gardner presiding. The proceedings opened with the
cross.examination of Farley by Col. Hastings
He testified that he had been connected with tue
Police Department for II or IS year, After hs acs Vi
Macdonald IN 1871 he was witness against him. Prior
TO the arrest on the Thuringa he did not know that
mcdonnell was in England. He had known the
prisoner by the Of Livingston, Barnum Bradiord
Maodonnel and Johnston He did not receive letter
from Macdonald the FAN OF 1872 he frequently re-
ceived letters from London at that time, but not
registered letter. He received letter from London
beginning Friend Phil" His wife had got registered
letter. but he did know whether 1t was one OF bust
ness or friendship The witness had recollection OF
the matter but thought from what he had seen IN the
newspapers that such letter must have been received
usually got from four 10 six foreign letters every
month. He received registered package from England
about the time referred to- aud none was received at bs
house. He did not the letter received by his VIE
the authorities refused TO show it, Farley then re-
hearsed the story OF the arrest the Thurngia To ms
knowledge no examination was made OF MaedonnelFs
state-rooin. The stewards handed out The bags OF
soveregus from the sateroOm there were ii pieces o
property handed out, including boxes the bags etc. Az
the the AFFIDAVIT made by witness that he mad
none Of the property he regarded the construct
lively In the possession OF mcdonnell The interests
that prompted witness TO assist In the arrest were Doth
professional pride and desire for the reward Capt.
Irving and himself had made application TO the Police
Board for permission to demand the reward.
Capt Irving was then cross-examined BY Col Hastings
His acquaintance with Macdonald began IN February,
1871, shortly before he arrested by Farley ana
McDougal; he had no knowledge, except through the
statement OF Mcdonnell that any cable kilograms were
sent witness by him he never recepod for any ana
the receipt in a handwriting he never knew; one
was directed TO No 40, and the other TO NO 20 West
Thirty secondst. the writing that Of sehoolboy;
did not resemble that Of his wife, Of any member
of his family in speaking OF the arrest of Macdonald
he said he did to mind it much and used Ian
cuage not very respectful TO the Bank OF England
Neither Farley nor himself made any examination OF
te state.room; Jarvis and Curry came in about that
time and took charge OF his effects.
Mr. Hall then stated that ne would Ike to address the
Court briefly the aspect of matters they appeared
to the defense. he read summary of the charges as
follows:
l. They are charged with collision with felon. in
meeting him a ship for the purpose Of receiving ms
booty.
a. They are charged with consprmg TO obstruct the
Sheriff in his duty and incidentally thereby protect
8 they are charged with perjury by swearing in an
attachment suit That they never had pIopery OF Mac
then held possession OF MacdonnelFs cane
Mr.. Hall then proceeded with his argument, an alb
etract Of which is given below Commissioners Smith
Duryea Gardner and Russell being present:
policeman is not like domestic servant to be dis
charged at caprice suspicion. But he is public
officer and many cited decisions show mat he can only
be removed upon Trial. at which only legal evidence
admissible in court Is 10 be considered The ordinary
policeman, who has 10 officially come IN contact win
dangerous offenders is put III the power OF their malice
and revenge. Much more q detective, who - always
playing with fire and handling edged tools the Bank
OF England prosecuted Macdonneil, ana prosecntes
Iyng @qd FIey GsR idPS sed 1 G
fa mt pf ie
with opportunity for crosse xannation or kilograms
which may have been concocted anywhere me story
that they Macdonald by arrangement TO ACT as re-
ceivors OF stolen goods IS palpa6le Invention III 80
why did they take Custom-ionse officer VINO would
diamonds7 The inevitable inference from all the CIR
Gusances that he did not bring bonds on bis person.
and The detectives did not act as cover
case The London police, by their telegram, selected
them ana they had IN addition their pride of Office.
10 is said they INSTRUCTED Jarvis. But Dr.
Mosher or JARVIS are peIjurers II JARVIS Is TO
What motive bad the detectives to keep Jarvis away
Not to spy Them say The aecnsers Bnt me Gns'%ni
@ dfes bcs,des that II was last seen on the finger Of
woman passenger The cane that Farley took Wa,
taken used openly. Jarvis said his attachment did
not cover It, and il afterward given 10 Inspector
Webb. No one prctends That Irving ana Farley ever
Mac ionncll again, except once when ne was
before the Commissioners. Tie case is not only not
sustained. but the testimony for the defense entirely
diSspates the mist Of prejudice and destroys the sean
das that have been put about officers OF AWAY aitnd
and reputable scrN zee. The motive is found IN Mae
donnes desire FOR revenge in which he took advantage
of the idea Jarvis obsructed NV them IN the
discharge OF his duty.
Col. Hastings then said was interpolated IN tins
case a time when nearly all the testimony lad been
taken, and IS therefore impossible FOR me to review
the evidence either side with that thoroughness
which q counsel would pursue who had been present
prom the beginning TO the end OF The tHaL shaH,
therefore, decline 10 make formal argument for the
prosecution and VIII offer only remark concerning
trial Ii l. this that II seems very singular 10 me
that the accused should IN letter to the Board Of Police
demand an investigation Of The charges made against
them wherein the broadest latitude would DC allowed
for the reception of evidence and then the very moment
the Investigation begun should object most sIe-
ousy 70 the introduction OF the strongest evidence
against Them | refer TO Macdonnells confession. To
aN all themselves OF the technces OF law surely
not following ont the spirit OF Their demand fnr an III
ycstgatiOn OF the broadcast nature