Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-01-24

WHAT WAS DONE WITH THE ELLIS CASE IN HIS
oFFICE-THE REASONS WHY NANrz WAS NOT
PROSECUTED.
When STAR reT orter last evening called the
attention OF the district attorney to a statement
Published In a morning paper, rejecting upon the
conduct OF the Ellis case by his Office that official
Sid: "The Only information this Office has had
OF what is k25w as the Ellis case has been the
statements III J!ishei In the papers No naCas OF
witnesses or any other Information than that fur
n.shed in the newspapers has been presented. And
IN or1er TO have the matter thoroughly investiga-
ted every OF those witnesses has been sub
lGalej to appear tefore the grand jury In order
that the jury may hear their statements concern
Ing tie connection Of certain detectives with the
all 'ced larceny
III reply to fur:h questions by the reporter the
district attorney stated that a man named Hall
was indicted. convicted IN sentenced for the lar
ceny or Miss Ellis jewelry on December Sd. The
gran jury, II nve stig ,ting the case against Hall!
concluded TO present Geo'ge Nanizas the receiver
OF sto,en property. on two misunderstanding
the jewel:y belonging TO Miss Ellis. and viOlin
belong n, to Prof. Gallagher. The G ,llayher case
iDasmuch as the property was undoubtedly shown
to have been at MantZ place, wLle in the F..,o
case the property had not been Recovered. Mr..
Tasgart. who had char: 81 the prosecution of po-
lice cases IN tie Criminal Court was informed
s!td to Baass Masn'ns'Ss woa5s s.
goods BY Mantz. and 20 the effect that he had ad-
vanced money upon Them Washington failed to
VI,
ment couli not go to trial with any hope of success
without him, the cases were continued in order to
secure his presence. At the request OF the dis
trict attorneys office Lieut. Guy found him. Mr..
Ta"gart had "A convers ttion with him in the dock,
and questioned him touching his knowledge of
the facts; AMI in response to the questions, Wash
1ngtol denied that he knew anything about either
the 1ewelry or the violin. and said that he had
never seen them.
The district attorney. continuing related In some
detail the circumstances attending the trial OF
Gallagher case. which came on la Nay, the jury
acquitting Manz, after Washington denied all
knowledge OF Mantz' connection with the goo,s
or That he had ever stated that he did know any
thing about 1t. The Ellis case. he said, depended
on this same testimony. ami 1t was 1tONe pressed
WI the full concurrence OF the court Mr. Tag
CART informed the parties interested that II any
evidence could be procured the nOle pros. would
be set aside or a new indictment found. Lieut..
Guy was informed that II single scrap of evil
dence could be found against MantZ that the dis
trict attorneys Office would be glad to reopen the
prosecution. From that time' said the district
attorn,y, until l saw Lieut.. Guys rather re-
m!rkable statement in the paper that he was sur
prl5ed, have heard nothing about the case.
know nothing OF Major Morgans connection
with it, or the private interviews that the parties
nothing OF these matters until my attention was
called to an interview with Miss Ellis published in
directed subraas to Issue to all the parties to let
the grand jury investigate it. Mr.. Taggart in
formed me sometime after the occurrence that he
had written note to either Mrs. Macdonald or
Miss Ellis, and also one to Lieut. Guy, inviting
them to come to the Office and have conference
IN relation to It. am very much surprised that
have Informed this office, If he had any Information
with regard to the commission of the crime II he
knew OF Major Morgan's attempt to set this watch
and thatit was in the possession of Mr. Williams he
certainly deserves the severeSt censure for neg
Letting 10 inform the district attorneys office OF
the facts, and have directed him to be summoned
DtIore the grand jury tomorrow. or this con-
ference between Guy AMI Morgan and Miss Ellis
anu other parties we knew nothing"