The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-12-07
A SINGULAR PROCEDURE,
A Cass Which Mayor Grubbs Thinks Needs
ExpIanatiOn-The SdgaOiOus
Superintendent.

The three prostitutes who were arrested in
Mabb's place on Wednesday evening. on the
charge Of grand larceny, for having robbed a
stranger who visited the house the night before
of $40, were released from custody yesterday
morning before daylight, and failed to appear in
the mayors court whom the case was reached.
An inquiry into the ''thusness' OF this developed
that during the night the amount of the alleged
loss had been paid to the turnkey by Mahb, and
in accordance with instructions which had been
previously given by the superintendent of pO-
lice, the three girls were released from
custody. In the light Of this Information,
the mayor remarked that he could
not understand what authority the superintend
ent of police had for such action. Tho superin-
tendent explained that it was not known which
of the girls had got tho money, and the
name of the man from whom it had been stolen
was also unknown, and stated chat he had as
suned the responsibility of ordering their re-
lease. This, however. was not q con vincing ar
Gument to the mayor. An affidavit was subse-
quently filed, charging the three females with
stealing $40 from 'tsome person unknown to the
atliant" The superintendent was the aforesaid
affant. Last night the 'person unknown to tn
afiant" had not been found and the girls were
still free. The News of last evening, after a
review of the matter, is moved to remark that
'the whole thing, from the arrest to the release,
is a very singular procedure, and it looks as il
te" machinery OF the ponce department had
strained To recover n loss ut the expense of the
criminal statute" When asked for an expiana-
ZION OF the case, last night, superintendent
Robbins (rhe only, etc.) stated that "fn releasing
the prisoners from custody he assumed the re-
sponsioility for their appearance In court" He
claimed, besides, that Mahb had given bond for
1900 for the girls. They had not been dis
charged, he said, but they were being held on
the charge until the man from whom the money
had been stolen could be found, and ne claimed
that the affidavit had been presented 10 the
prosecutor yesterday moratnG before the case
was called.
Major Robbins tthe only, etc) fails to explain
by what system OF evasions and omissions he
neglected to ascertain tho name of the complain
ant. The man appealed to the poilce for
their assistance in recovering the money
which he claimed TO have lost.
and it is not eXaetly clear how
the superintendent failed TO ascertain
his name, and why he ordered the arrest of the
girls on the statement of Ii maH whose name he
The Only stated last night that he had since
seen the man at the Scottish Rite rooms, Int
even Oh this occasion his extraordinary police
sagacity seems to have deserted him to such an
extent that he again failed to inquire who the
alleged victim Was. On the night feii0wihg the
arrest the girls, through Madame Mabb. LETT $40
with the station-house turnkey TO be given
to their acouser when he called for 1t,
with the explanation that if they were ar
ralgned IN court, whether convicted or acquitted
OF the larceny charge, they would be fined under
the 1ll,fane law to an amount equnling, at least,
intending costs. the amount represented as haH-
Ing been stolen, and they preferred giving that
much money (which they were compelled to boT-
row to taking chances in the court. Truly. this,
at the News remarks. 's a Very singular pro-
lFCedure.b