National Republican., 1883-03-22
NO ouEsTIoNs ASKED.
A Little Incident Ina Detective tic Scandal
What Prominent citizen Thinks OF

A Little Incident in Detective tito Scandal
What n Prominent citizen Thinks OF
the Force.
case has recently come TO light, which
has not before been published, that shows
some Of tho methods employed by tho ex.de-
! tectycs in Fleeing those who were so un-
| fortunate as to be the victims Of thieves and
! pickpockets. About u year ago their came
| to this city u Swcde named Lundberg, who
| was naval constructor, and who had certain
| plans for the construction of war vessels
| which he desired to present to the navy de-
partment.
on the first of April he presented letter of
/ credit which he had brought from Barring
! Bros, London, at the banking house Of Lows
/ johnson & Co., and drew certain amount OF
money He left the bank and took u Ninth
street car. The car was rather crowded and
he was josted by u couple of men, whose
movements did not particularly arrest his at
tcntion at the time, but came back forciby
subsequently when he discovered that his
pockotbook, containing his money which he
had just drawn, his letter Of credit, and many
private papers of decided value to him, had
been stolen.
He reported his loss at police headquarters,
and the case was assigned to Detective Voss
to work up. That officer advised Mr.. Lund-
berg 10 advertise for the return of his pocket
book In the newspapers, and wrote tho follow
ing, which appeared under the houd of " Lost
aud Found" in the REPUBLICAN, under date
April 3, 1882
A pocketbook containing STA and papers was
taken in Ninth street cur, at the corner Of f
street, on April l, about II q, m. If the pocket
book with all the papers-which are OF no value
to any one but the owner, who Is In immediate
nocd Of them--is returned to QOj NJ street north.
west, no questions will be asked,
Early Monday morning, in tho very first
mail, the pockctbook minus the money was
returned to Mr.. Lundberg and tho rapidity
with which the advertisement was responded
TO caused u suggestion that the detective must
have had some knowledge ut least of the thief
and the poCketbOOk.
In this connection il may be said that in
conversation with n prominent citizon last
night REPUBLICAN reporter asked what was
the measure of responsibility which should
rest upon the officer who had charge Of tho
detectives, and who permitted oil this iniquity
and corruption to 20 on undor his very nose
"Why," was the reply, he should bo held
wholly responsible. 1t was his duty to know
what was going on, and ii he did not know he
failed in the performance of that duty. II he
did know of the practices of the detectives
then he is morally as guilty as they"
"Havo you any idea what the commission
ers will do in the matter of reorganization of
the police fOrceP"
"None; no more than you have Whatever
action they propose to take, they have kept
their own counsel. / should suppose how
ever, that the first move would be TO make n
change in tho office of major and superin-
tendent. Then | should think they would
commence with the work ofpurgation right at
headquarters. Whoever cannot show perfectly
clean hands then should go at once, The rest
of the matter will be easy, If the man selected
for superintendent is of the right sort. Now
want you not to misunderstood me in urg-
ing II change in the superintendents. | con-
slider Maj. Brock an honest and faithful man,
but he has not force enough for the position,
and | think he himself would admit this If
questioned right closely.