Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1884-12-11
THE QUARTER SESSIONS.
AvJoURsEp r~Rm roR pnowMssR.

ADJOURNED TrRm FOR DEoEMBER.
Tho Testimony In tho suit Against Aidcrmau
spurrisr tor Tskiog Fees sos services
That Were Not Performed.
Wednesday Morning. The Jury In the
case Of common wealth vs.. Jacob ID. WarfcI,
false pretense, returned verdict OF guilty.
A motion was made In arrest of judgment
and reasons filed for new trial.
The district attorney called tho case Of
commonwealth VS.. Alderman A. X. Spur.
r!cr for trial. After the selection of q jury
the opening speech was made for the COM.
monwealth by 4. X. Martin, and he stated
that the accused was indicted for takiug
fees as IN alderman for services not per.
formed. He then recited Q number Of
cases in which those irregularities were
found to exist, among which were
those Of Levi Stefy, in which Alderman
Spurrier charged for issuing q subpoena,
taking reoognizanoe and having hear.
Ing services, it Is alleged, which we're not
performed.
Charles +. Echmau was the first witness
called and he testified that Levi Sicily
owed him u board bill and he went to
Alderman Spurrier to consult him In refer.
ence TO collecting the same. Spurrer told
him he would send Sicily a notice ana II
that did not bring the answer, suit would
be brought against him for jumping his
board bill. A short time after that he was
handed tho amount Of the board bill by
Alderman Spurrier. The amount was
about 90 OF ell, but not more than the
| latter amount. He was positive that he
had mover attended hearing at Alderman
| Spurrier's office as witness in this case
aud had never been subpeuaed to attend
at his office. On cross examination Eich.
man was shown criminal complaint
charging Stefy with false pretcnse and
| asked whether the signature was not his.
He said it resembled his writing, and after
| repeated questions by court aud counsel he
finally said that in his judgment, the sigma
ture was his.
He was also asked whether no had not
given Spurrier receipt for the amount Of
the board bill of Steffy, aud he could not
remember that he had Upon receipt
for sl4, in full for the amount OF the board
bill being shown him, he admitted that
the signature was his.
Wilmer Steffy testified that he was
brother of Lovi Stefiy, and that he did not
know any person by the name OF George
Steffy, one of the persons alleged to have
beer present at tho alderman's office at the
, hearing of Levi. Witness paid To Alder
, man Spurrier SIT 70 for a board bill owed
! by his brother. After he paid this amount
he got a discharge from the alderman for
. his brother. Witness was never az
hearing against his brother for false pre-
. tense at Alderman Spurrier's Office.
D Levi Steffy testified that he was arrested
at Petersburg, this county, IN 1883. by
Officers Leman aud Eicholtz on the com.
/ plant made py Eichmau, aud &rougbt to
this city. The next morning witness was
taken to Jail and was released after being
locked up for an hour. He was never
given hearing by Alderman Spurrier and
d was not at his office at any time.
Henry Mohu testified that In November
= 1882 he went to the Office of Alderman
a Spurrier and entered a suit for assault and
battery against Frank Boyd, John Hersh-
= ock and Albert Hershock. He only
o intended to enter one suit against them.
n To the best of his knowledge he did not
t enter suit against these parties for drunk
# eDness and disorder!y conduct (two
charges> and malicious mischief Witness
!, | was positive there was no hearing in the
:, suit brought by him. He went to
Il the alderman's office and told him that he
did not intend to appear against the parties.
t Witness said that Alderman Spurrier had
II several conversations with him in reference
n to these cases, during which the alderman
b tried to make it appear to him that hear.
n ing were had in these cases.
- Elmer Hershock, one of the young men
N arrested on the complaint of Henry Mohn,
testified that he had been arrested but he
10 could not remember whether or not there
Is was hearing in the case.
n John Hershock also arrested on Mohn's
}, complaint testified that he did not remem.
Is Der that there was hearing had in the
Is case.
If Frank Boyd, the third ono arrested on
! Mohn's complaint, testified thai he did not
sign any recognizance nor did he remem.
Il Der of any hearing TAX iug place.
g Joseph w. Baker testified that his
% partner bought a horse from Samuel
u Greenly, which it was afterwards learned
g was stolen, and then Alderman Spurrier
z was consulted. As result of what
p Spurrier told HIM he entered several suits
It against Samuel Greenly. In Spurrier's
It bill charges are mado for hearings in the
several cases and a number of witnesses
b were charged for rs being sworn. Among
J. them was witness, but ke was positive
" that he had never been sworn as & witness
If in the cases against Groenly.
It Wednesday Epsning-The trial Of tho
% suit against Alderman Spurrier was re-
r sumed. Jacob w. Baker testified that he
8 had the suit brought against Greenly. He
a settled with him for $50, and Greenly was
= to pay the costs. There was no hearing
}. at Spurrier's and witness did not know
, that there was a criminal suit against
, Greenly until told. Witness said that Spur.
D rier came to his house, accompanied by
jacob Hollinger, tipstaff, and Spurrier
tried to make him believe that he had en-
tered criminal suit, but witness denied
it at that interview that he had entered
such suit. Spurrier met witness after.
| wards and asked him to say to the grand
> jury that there was hearing 10 that case.
A. +. Hostetter testified that he was
. counsel for Greenly, and he went to Spur.
rier's office and demanded a hearing, but
: the demand was not aoeeded to con-
tiDuance was had and that is the last
witness heard of tho case.
Samuel Greenly testified that he settled
!, the case with Baker by paying him s55.
: ! There never was a hearing in the case
against him.
Albert McCradle, Thomas flanagan,
: Charles A. Miller and Howard Hess, who
appeared on the aldermsn's bill as wit
! n esses, testified they were not summoned
as witnesses in the several cases charged.
John III. Fry testified to the bills as
presented by Spurrier for fees in the cases
in dispute.
Alderman Barr testified that Alderman
Spurrier was qualified to his bills before
: him.
,, Commissioner Myers testified that war
, : rants were made out for the bills pre-
| sented