The sun., 1881-05-29
BEGINNING TIE DEFENCE,
MAYOR GRICE'S WITNESSES COyTRA-
DICTED ON lrATERIAL POINTS.
RefutiuT the Charges OF Hribery-As 10 the
Motives of Some OF the Witnesses for the
Prosecution-Facts About Witness Lane.

Refutiur the Charges OF Hribery-As 10 the
Motives of Some OF the Witnesses for the
Prosecution-Facts About Witness Lane.
The defence Of tho three Police Commis-
sioners against whom Mayor Grace has madd
charges was begun yesterday morning. Mr..
Willard Bartlett. who conducted the defence.
made no formal opening. but proceeded at once
to call witnesses to contradict the allegations OF
the Mayors witnesses
George Morgan. employed In the Street Clean-
Ing Department for the pasttwenty- one months.
was the first witness. He testified specially to
contradict the testimony OF Patrick 0'Neil and
John J. Moran as to the dumping OF permit
dirt and the payment OF bribes to inspectors at
the Twelfth street dump. Mr.. Morgan testified
that at the time referred to by Patrick 0'Neil
there was no permit dirt dumped al
night. only ashes. garbage. and street
dirt Mr.. Morgan denied positively the
allegations Of o'Neil as to the payment Of
money for permission to dump private dirt
He remembercd the Investigation BY the Police
Commissioners, into the charges made by
Moran that Drbss Were F. and ne sd
bribe could not recognize him as the one who
received the money; q, This The witness Ia accounted
1s he onse caught al
boat belonging to the Department. He COM
and tho inference was that the charges OF
bribery !g, ay2sS from desire for revenge on the
MIR. Andrews cross. examined the. witness
very briefly. procuring the Admission that while
the dgmp1s bs G9Ps hs the witness re-
and elicited the fact that when the carts went
that he had every opportunity to see what was
on the carts.
rRsS ,ss FSsy %p ThS was bs or e q:
mony Of Mr.. Morgan. and denied that any
money had been paid to him for the dumping Of
There was no cross examination.
Bernard I. Broean., dump inspector at the
Of what was dumped there. for the ' purpose oi
c9ntradictipg some Of the MAYORS witnessed
Sh had city to fs Doso % he 1
and %, at which time the Mayor s Witnesses tes:
On cross examination Mr.. Andrews asked
street dump on Jan. 90 last. Tho witness an.
swered that Mr.. g. Manek was there. Then NJ.
eamo same man Who was at the dump on Jan. SO. '.'
Mr. Willard Bartlett objected to this. as touch.
question not raised ,s on the direct
was not allowable for them to Introduce new
Ht Pending 'I{ the decision of the question tho
Mayor annouMHced ai1 need recess, reeess, Upon o reas-
and excluded the question.
Mr., Willard Bartlett. on the, redirect exam-
had i deeetod o persons Attempting to dump Cellar
SSas 5S5 Williams han Who haS rS
Daniel Mqigan; trimmer Ct the Market Es street
no cellar dirt was dumped at that time. The
witness gave an amusing account 81 his fight
the prosecution. He said that he and Lane went
away from the dump and returned drunk At
80 NJ aT sfA HSs sS HnS s
He said that as he was the smaller nun; no Kept
away from Lane. Aforward Lane preferred a
ead BY M
for the defence. He identified various returns
contradict the testimony Of previous witnesses
as to the dumping OF private dirt ON the city
tmony Of James Drlsco thai toni on Feb a6 cellar liar
| dirt was dumped on the Canal street dump.
Ss ad doubt Sy M R eoSd
in his office and see all the carts that passed to
Thomas Dillon was called by Mr.. Bartlett for
TIE M defSinee and he ecorroborated the testimony
OF Hri NcS0rm'csi Srai9 sisrooronbar nj tho po,cs
Central ONCE. was examined to, show that the
| charges OF the witness Lane against the men az
by the Police Commissioners. This was to dis
prove the story Of Lane that he had been dis.
missed because he ma, made the charges II and not
The stenogrnpher's record showed that the
Commissioners had examined the charges un;
der direction OF Commissioner Nichols and
taken voluminous testimony. One OF the Wit
plainant Lane had struck" everybody who
came down to the dump for ten cents, or five
had testified that Lane asked them for money.
AS tho result OF the examination 1t appeared
that the charges made by Lnno had been dis
missed as not proven before the Commi Sc ioners.
Michael Goode Inspector OF the Market street
which the charges brought by the witness Lane
were dismissed. Mr.. Goode reaf1irmed his de-
| niRl OF Lanes charges.
William Barrett also reaf1rmed his testimony
The Mayor announced an adjournment until
| Tuesday morning,