The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-03-13
POLICE SUPERINTENDENT WALLING.

HIS TRIAL YESTERDAY BEFORE THE BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS.
The fall Board of Police Commissioners met in
the cOur: room at Headquarters yesterday after.
noon at two O'Clock, President Matsell presiding,
to try superintendent Wang on the charges pre-
ferred against him by Mr.. A. Oakley Hall for
the Illegal detention OF John Sweeny, Daniel
Hawry and James Drew, arr es;ed on the 5sh Of
last month suspicion OF being implicated in the
Adams Express robbery. The court room was
comfortably filed with spectators, and the lotbles
OF the building were alive with knots or men
anxiously discussing the probable result OF the
trial.
Ex-Mayor A. Oakley Hall appeared Tor the prose.
cution and Counsellor John II. Strahan repre-.
sented the defence.
The first witness called was the Assistant Clerk
of the First District Police Court, VINO testified
that Court was held on Saturday, February 6, and
Sunday, February 7, from nine to half-past ten
A. M.
JOHN swEENY,
one of TIE arrested men. next took the stand ana
testified as follOws:-Friday, February s, was
arrested at midnight and brought TO Police Head.
quarters, where was incarce rated; saw Super.
intendent Walling the following day in the fore.
noon, and was questioned by him in
regard to the Adams Express robbery; was told
on Sunday morning by Superintendent Walling
that A. Oakley Hall was my counsel; did not know
that he had been engaged until was so informed
by Mr.. Walling; the superintendent read letter
from Mr. Hall stating that he tHalij had been en-
gagged to act as counsel for me; was detained IN
the cell at Police Headquarters until the following
Monday morning, when was taken before Justice
Kilbreih at the Ioombs.
MARGARET SwEENY,
the sister OF the last Witness testified that she
came TO Police Headquarters on Saturday morn.
Ing, February 9, between nine and ten O'Clock. ana
asked superintendent Waling Tor permission TO
see her brother john who was confined there as
prisoner; he refused my request, saying, 'Come
here at five O'Clock this evening and Will see about
It," came back a about tive O'Clock the same day
and again renewed my request of superintendent
Wallng and was again refused; then tod him
that had seen counsel and That they han IN
ne5 e the to lie 5foust to
court; he (tne SuperintendenD replied, saving,
',end your counsel here and I'll send them to
the s tate Prison."
on the cross-examiDatton by Counsellor Strahan
the witness stated that she had employ ed A. OaEey
Hall to act counsellor for ner brother, AMI had
paid him nom fund OF $4,000 placed in her hands
by her brother previous TO his arrest, to be dis
posed or II employing legal aid should he be ar
rcsted.
The witness further stated that she had paid
the unexpended balance OF this fund into the Dis
trict Attorneys ONCE.
MRS. HAwRY,
the wife of one OF the prisoners, took the stand
ana swOre that she had sought permission o!
superintendent Walling see her husband while
he was confined as prisoner in Police Headquar.
ters, and had been refused.
James Drew, one OF the arrested men, testlfe
that he was arrested on Friday night. February 5,
on suspicion OF being concerned in the Adams
Express robbery; was confined at Police Head
quarters until the following Monday morning,
when he was taken to court and discharged. the
defence, in cross-questioning, elected from the
witness the TACT that he frequently associated
with Sweeny and Hawry.
SUPERINTENDENT wALLlNG
was next placed on the stand and subjected to
long serie! OF skuy put lnterrogatories by
Counsellor Hal who aimee to m. make the witness
the prisoners over twenty-lour hours III a cell
without bringing them before police magistrate;
also that ne hal violated the police regulation
that makes 1t compulsory upon tie Superin.
tendent 70 notify tie Board OF Police Commissio,,.
ers when any prisoner has been detained over
twenty-four hours without being brought before
magistrate.
The SuperIntendenL's testimony was to the
effect that ne had acted coDscentlouslv IN the
premises. doing what he conceived to be his duty;
he had not notified the Board OF commissioners,
as required by police regulations, SIMPLY because
there was no Board to notify during the time the
men were IN custody; no session o! the Board had
been held from the time the men were arrested to
the time they were brought to cOuTt the wit
ness felt that ne had not exceeded his authority
hs SeS re as oa naSs
evaded Justice; lie denied having used the Ian
guage alleged by the witness, Margaret Sweeny.
At the conclusion OF superintendent Walling's
testimony EX-Mayor Han stated to the Board that
ne was there, not as counsel but merely oy the
permission OF the Board, 70 crossexaDine the wit
hesses. He mad no speech t. make. He then with
drew from the room.
Mr.. strahan, In summing up for the deence.
read from the Statutes ana from the police regu-
la;ions 10 show that 1t WIS within the discretion
OF the superintendent of Police 10 detain q pris-
Oncr over twenty.four hours without bringing HIM
before a magistrate, provided that sucn de-
tentlOn was brought TO the notice OF
the Board OF Ponce Commissioners. In the
present case Mr.. Waliing could not have
notified the Board OF his acton, BECAUSE
as the records would show, they were not In SEES.
sion. Had they been IN session during the time
the prisoners were held in custody at Headquar
tiers the superintendent miRnt nave been held to
answer. put there being no Board Ia session it was
Impossible for MIN to nctily as required lnGivid-
ual members did rot cons itutc BOard.
In regard 10 the third specification that the
defendant had used di5respectiul language tie
counsel urged that the denial OF the defendant
Margaret STeeny.
President Matseil tncn adjourned the Board,
stating hat tie decision was reserved.