The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-09-05
CHARLEY ROSS.

AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION WITH sUPERIN-
TENDRNr wALLING-MRs. MosHER DOES NOT
KNOW WHERE THE CHILD Is-HER ANXIETY
TO FIND HM-MR. AND MRS wEsTERvELT's
IGNoRANcE-THE PROBABLY BARREN RESULT
OF wRsrERvELT's TRIAL.
PHILADELPHIA, Sept 4, 1875
Police Superintendent Walling, of New York, prob
ably knows about the Charley Ross mystery than
any other police official II was in the latter part OF
July, 1874 the month of the abduction that he first
had his suspicion drawn to Moshcr and Douglass
being the probable guilty ones and from that time until
their sudden death at Bay Ridge the close of that
year, he and his subordnaes looking for them
The police have been censured in the unmeasured
terms their want of The public have
a scapegoat of this kind, and
abuse of the detectives is therefore always
cheap and fashionable That .they were in some meas
ure blamable for lack of vigilance Is true but may
fairly be questioned whether It is not our whole de
tective system, rather than the individuals who
pose it, that deserves such wholesale denunciaton.
WHAT SUPERINTENDENT wALLING SAYS
The Superintendent left for New York last evening"
having finished his evidence in the trial of Westervet
yesterday afternoon Before his departure the HERALD
correspondent had long talk with him in regard to the
kidnapping of the child and how far Westervelt
concerned in it as accessory either before after
the act ~ have objection to talk about the
now said he, ''but before had given my testimony
in court l steadily refused to say word" This was
literally true for his arrival In this city he had
been beseged by about hundred local reporters, to
whom his invariable reply was, 81 don't know"
MosHERs STATEMENT.
''The HERALD's interview with Mrs Mosher," said
the Chief 81 believe to be true. 1t is just she
always talked to But better for thinking
have in the fact that Mr. Ross's visit to her day
or two before is alluded to- Now nobody knew of this
except herself, Mr. Ross and the police But II the
article gives any the idea that she knows where
Charley Ross is 1t is mistake She cannot say with
any certainty that the child will be restored to its pa
rents, for she does not know where he is. You may
be perfectly certain with emphasis that If Mrs Mosher
knew where Charley Ross would have known
and the child would have been Immediately restored to
its parents"
The writer said that the popular belief was that she
knew than she would tell and asked If any injus
tice had been done to her in so believing.
MosHER AIDING THE POLICE.
''It Is certainly bad" he replied. 81 sure that
Mrs Mosher is very anxious for the return of the child
have been in constant communication with her She
has come to my house repeatedly She has come ia
at my residence in the middle of the night, cry
ing and distressed, and said, Mr. Walling, cannot
sleep from thinking of that child cannot but think
might be of my and that might be in its poor
mothers place She told me that If she gets the
slightest hint to where it is concealed lift Is alive
day night it may be- She has begged me to let her
know the instant we find IT, saying that she cannot rest
until 1t is found She is willing to help us in every way
and am sure she knows nothing of its place OF con-
ceament"
'.Does she think 1t is alve9''
eyes, she thinks is, great many other people
do; but she knows nothing about it. She says shs
knows her husband would noe have killed it,
HIS OPINION wEsTIRvELT.
''Mr Walling. you had abundant opportunity to study
Westervelt's character What do you think of him
Did he or does he know where Charley Ross was hid
dcnin
II do not believe that westervelt ever knew where
Charley Ross was Further than this / don't think
that Mrs Mosher did that even Douglass knew
Mosher was not man to trust anybody Douglass had
given him away once, and don't think Mosher would
trust him again. Mosher himself took of the
child and kept the secret OF its hiding place to him.
self"
'As to westervelt's character I'1hink him to be
cunning fellow, but not very strong. He would not
have enough to assist Mosher in the Kidnapping
and was afraid Of him. He would not give Mosher up
partly because he was his brother-in-aw, partly be-
of his fear of HIM, and perhaps" significantly
"for other reasons He did finally profess willingness
to catch Douglass for us; but don't believe he was
willing do that either He wanted the reward but
either afraid TO work for it or thought he could
make more from the men,"
''Did he give you much information OF value when
you were looking for Mosher and Douglass ?"
CARRYING SHOULDERS.
''No | never found his information of any use. II
was always too late am satisfied that whenever he
did tell anything he had either warned them before
them. For instance, he knew where Moshef
and Douglass lived in Philadelphia just before
were hired and yet he did not tell until months
after although he protesting do all he could
help me. OF his three days visit to Rondout, with
Douglass and Mosher he never told me ut all He did
tell me that the men had clpper-bullt boat and
when inquired found they had sold it. Everything
he gave too late to be of He in
municatiOn with the men, but very anxious that
he himself should not be watched Whenever he told
me the men frequented certain places and had them
watched they Immediately stopped coming They
often to Stromberg's salaoon, Mott street, I
found out and | had that place watched. westervet
iZan hn NDrN M an1 has
and Douglass never came there again"
wEsTERvELT.
''How about Mrs Westervelty"
''She knows nothing whatever about the child and
never did. They cannot convict her US an accessory
whatever they may do to her husband. She came
here to be tried voluntarily by my advice Sh,
came to me TO ask me about 1t. told Westervet to
come over when he came to me last April ] advised
him that IT would look better for him 10 go voluntarily
than to wait for a warrant Of requisltion."
wEsTERvELT's TRIAL
edo you think Westcrvelt will be convicted ~
~ suppose they might convict him as an accessory
after the fact, believe called for concealing in
formation They certainly cannot lind him guilty as a
consplrator TO abduct the child, do see how his
trial will throw any light the childs fate There
several points that the District Attorney did not bring
out in taking my testimony. One was about
LETTER rs 1874
This the .lcter Bill Mosher to the woman
ut the Rondout Lighthouse enclosing bill for a boai
he repaired for her II was written by Mosher 10
Philadelphia ON the 25th Of June, but dated In New
York on the 26th where an answer was TO be sent,
MOsher enclosing addressed envelope, on which he
had written his assumed Of William Hendricks
weslcrvelt brought this letter over TO New York aud
mailed il. This letter | obtained. IL was valuable
showing concusvey that II was written by the same
hand that wrote anonymous letters to Mr.. Ross The
handwriting was precisely the same. remember
peculiarly IN particular In the small rs in the let
ter the writer instead Of finishing them at the bottom
by stroke to the right, had turned them under the
left All the t's' In the Ross letters had this same
peculiarly. | sent this letter over to Philadelphia
but il was among other things that the District At
torney did not question Inc about"
In concluding the conversation the Chief expressed
again his opinion with emphasis, that Mrs. Mosher
docs not know where the child that the trial OF
Wcstervelt will not result IN convictng him AS one OF
the abductors.
The great object which the District Attorney and the
merchants and citizens VINO compose what may bc
called Charley Ross committee have in view in trying
this Wcsteryclt Is not much To punish him as
lind out the fate Of the stolen child and to secure its
return II II yet ycs as they very generally think that
II does. MI Wallngs opinion that the trial viii not
result IN tins disclosure Is important and the ~
from the Tact That Is cOrroboraied by the VI
other police officials in this city, who have devoted