Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1886-11-20


the only other New York newspaper that imi-
tates the Times in this.
Mr. I ,Oo always aePseeated Mr. Raymonas
and Straightforward to be politician, he said.
He analyzed every question from conscien-
and he finally went down in partv =. st pas1Is'
I was in Europe when received a letter hon
him saying that he had finally been read out of
he voted against negro suffrage. He voted in
accordance with his convictions however and
many mi g1od man has since then fancied that
1sos :. 6unMIses AND BLAknnr Hall.
TELLING AN INFAMOUS STORY.
Ex.Alderman Duffy Corroborates Full.
CRAFTS Revelations Of the Broadway
Franchise Steal.
The revelations of Alderman Fuilrraff in the
trial of Alderman McQuade, in New York. yes.
terday afternoon, as printed in THE STAR
were followed by others from Alderman Duffy.
showing how the whole Infamous Broadway
railway franchise steal was carried through.
After the direct examination of FulIgraf, q
consultation of the lawyers was held. The
audience, who had listened with deep interest
using their hands as ear trumpets, settled back
in their seats to discuss the astounding testi-
mony of the witness. The witness looked like
. boy who had been caught in a melon patch.
On crOss-examination, when asked why he
he turned states evidence. He raised his right
hand above his head as he replied: ~ have
done 1t because of remorse-remorse of a man
The witness face had borne all the marks OF
mental agony, and his voice had been husky
broke down. and said, in half whisper: Il
don't know" After a short pause the question
was explained by the court.
and that MIR. Newcombe was mistaken in say.
ing that he affirmed before the senate investi-
g9tlng committee. He would not tell a lie on
affirmation TO harm any man.
Mr. NewcOmbe read extracts from the exam
1nation OF t'ullgran as witness before the sem
ate committee, which was contradictory to hts
present testimony. In one place Fullgratf had
testified that he had not conyersed with other
aldermen on the subject of the Broadway fran
eh1se bill. Other contradictions were noted by
Mr.. NewcOmbe, who asked the witness if his
former evidence on these points was true or
combe then asked the witness if he had com
mitted perjury before the. senate committee.
II presume so,' replied Fullgraft.
.syou committed perjury to save yourself from
punishment for bribery on that occasion, did
The witness cast his eyes down and answered
rot at all. AS more questions were given show
Ing up his character in bad light, the witness
assumed something OF the air OF one placed In a
position where fight was necessary, and his face
wore a look Of defiance. 80
l.; Alter recess Falgraf said that Waite had told
him the reason for the call to a special meeting
was that Lawyer Lyddy had got out an in
junction restraining the board from Issuing a
franchise to any one for road on Broadway,
un q had consented to raise the Injunction for
Sl1.5O0. They feared that Lyddy would get
out another injunction to bleed the railway
company more. This was the reason witness
signed the call.
Mr.. Newcombe continued, exposing the con-
Trajectory statements of tuilgraff before the
senate committee. FullgraH acknowledge d
every material point OF his testimony before the
senate committee to be false.
a statement IN his testimony before the COM
i,aI I,
a member OF the board OF 1854, only because of
the stories started by the newspapers; that he
would SUCK TO the members OF that board as
long as they lived; but that he considered there
We're honest and pure men in that board as
eyer sat on Gods footslool, was read by Mr.
Newcombe. 81 can say now broke in Full
board"
did you refer to your own purity then:''
Eyes, sir; was and am now but for that
one act" Witness said he had never s.given
away" the "boodle" aldermen until his ar
rest ior his alleged connection with the grant
Ing Of a franchise to the 34th street road
in 1884. He was then induced TO make a
general statement regarding the Broadway
prosecution for his own transactions in con-
nectlon with the granting OF a franchise to
that road. Later, the inducement of protec-
board of 1884 was made at Inspector Byrne's
once. Witness was urged TO make an entire
MADE che statement, with Mr.. Marines aid.
Witness at first refused the proposition at In
spector Byrne's office. He wanted TO consult
with his family. He was allowed to go home.
He consulted with his family and his son.in-
Law, and concluded TO make a statement.
-, Witness was asked il he had returned his
doodle" on being stricken with remOrse. He
answered, 81 shall ii God let's me live" .But
have your" persisted the lawyer. Witness ac-
kuoWiedged that he had not. He confessed
that he had received $1,000 tor his vote in
another railroad matter, and had not returned
it. either, but declared that he would when he
could. MIR. Newcombe read the names of the
"boodlers" said to be at the meetings at Nc
Laughlin's, and asked II the witness had not
named aldermen whom he knew to be either
dead, out OF this jurisdiction, crazy or in prison
for crime, aside from his .feliOw-squeulers,"
Duffy and Waite and the defendant. Witness
s1Io ne nad: witness gave Inc other names OF
the 13 not before mentioned as Doty, Clearly,
"Charlie" Reilly and ONeil.
When the direct examination was resumed,
Fu1grad said that he was not asked TO incul-
pate any one In his statement to MARITIME lie
made the statement because his conscience
troubled him, and it was the only restitution
be could make for what he had done He said
he felt his disgrace keenly, more on account OF
his family Than his own. He had received
sig, 900 from The two transactions for which he
had been indicted, and would restore it to the
city soon as he had chance
DUFFY CORROBORATES FULLGRAFF.
Ex-Alderman Michael Duffy gave testimony
which corroborated Fullgraffs. He said he had
served three terms in the board. After one of
the meetings of the board eight or nine mem
bers, including McQuade, held u little caucus to
FIX up" Tor meeting at Fullgratt's Office. Wit
ness went to the factory about 7 y. M, and
found twelve other members there, including
McQuade. The meeting discussed making a
combination tor controlling legislation on rail
road and some other matters. Witness named
nine members who We're present, from memory,
and by referring to list OF the board gave the
other three members They correspondent to
Fullgraff7s list. I'VE decided to have u meeting
later at McLaughlin's house. The same thirteen
members were present at that meeting. AT that
meeting we talked about railroad matters. We
met one week later at McLaughlins. AT the Sec
Ond meeting Aldermen DeLacy and Jaehne ar
gued about the roads. There would be 5000, 900
In the Broadway road, and that the cable road
would put up $75O,OOO. But half OF it was to
be in bonds, and it was said that there were too
many in the cable company, aud they put it to
vote the question OF which road they
would side with, aud voted to pass anu slide In
the Broadway Surface railroad. Alueim man
Jaehne said that the figure given, So, 900
apiece was too big; that there wonld not he as
some expenses to come out OF the Doodle, This
was the first proposition, but one OF the alder
men thought We ought 10 have spa, 900 apiece.
Aldermen DeLacy and Cleary talked, and they
500 900 apiece, aud the caucus voted and the
proposition was carried at the third meeting
or the second one at McLaus HANS u week after,
the talk was about where the money was going
was opposed to Moloney. He thought he could
not be trusted with SO much money. He
might walk off with it. 1 proposed Mr.
Keenan,, and he was elected. The vote was
bill was passed TOR the Broadway railroad Au-
gust 9Th. 1t came back vetoed. There was an
other meeting OF the caucus at McI.aughiiu's
house In the evening. MaQuade and the rest
were there. There was talk about Mr.. Molo-
Iey getting other votes to pass 1t over the veto.
II was said it would cost something to get them
and It was all LEFT TO Moloney. He was to look
up four or five votes and pay for them. They