The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-02-22
THE BROADWAY RAILROAD CASE.
An Unusually Large Attendance. the Result
Of Rumors as to Sensational Testimony.

An Unusually Large Attendance. the Result
Of Rumors as to Sensational Testimony.
NEW YORK. Feb. 20.-The report that two of
the aldermen of 1884, who voted for the grant
ing of the Broadway railroad franchise, had con-
fessed the whole plot by which the Broadway
Surface Railroad Company had secured the con-
sent Of the Common Council. brought out an
unusually large attendance at the continuation
Of the hearing before the Senate committee to-
day. Three of the aldermen, Cleary, McQuade
and Farley, were also present Alderman Full
graft was also there
When Chairman Low called the committee to
order Mr. Conkling called Henry w. Minister, .
deputy Of the Sergeant alarms, to the commit
tee, as the first witness. He testified as to the
serving of subpenas on several parties. The
witness said that he spent several days
at the Laurel House, Lake Wood,
n. j., during the past two weeks.
While there he saw John Keenan, and Alderman
De Lacey. William Maloney's name appeared
on the register of the hotel on Jan. 20 and Feb.
5. While standing upon the platform of the sta
ton at Lake Wood, he saw Q gentleman about
fifty years Of age OF slender build, with long
side whskers. talking with Alderman De Lacey.
waiting for the train. The witness was pacing
up and down, too At one time, as he passed
the couple, he heard De Lacey say to his CON-
panion: IF no one squeals, and us people
around the City Hall" The remainder Of the
sentence was lost The last visit to Lake Wood
made by the witness was on Feb Is. John
Keenan, was still there.
When Mr.. Minister had retired from the stand.
Mr.. Conkling raising his voice, called outs lis
William Maloney within the reach Of my voice2"
dncH ell al vvoH< hAn Aai
ing to answer. Then, turning to Mr.. Richard
II. Newcomb. who represents a number Of the
aldermen. he asked him to prepare q list of those
present, as he had been unable to serve num-
Der of them with subpmnas
The cashier Of the National Broadway Bank,
Arthur T. j. Rice. was the next witness. He
was examined In regard to the account Of Jacob
Sharp with his bank. An effort was made to
fnd to whom the $3.50, 744 that Mr.. Sharp had
checked out was paid. The witness was unable
to tell. as most Of the checks had come from
other banks through the clearing house; but he
gave the names Of the banks that sent the checks
to the clearinghouse. The cashiers of these
banks will doubtless be called and an effort made
to trace Mr. Sharp's money continued.
Edward NJ Knox testified that he took meas
ures to secure an Injunction against the Broad
way road because he believed such road should
not be built; that he received letter from L. E.
Chittenden asking witness to call at his Office.
and saying that it would be to witnesses pecuniary
advantage TO do 80. Continuing, Mr.. Knox said
Il did call upon the gentleman, who stated that
there were number of capitalists who were
opposed to giving away the Broadway franchise.
They wanted mo to head suit against Mr..
Sharp's company. The injunction was secured,
but was afterward dissolved. The names given
of the gentlemen interested in the opposition to
the road we're h. B. Thurber. w. G. Whitney,
Lawson N. Fuller. and several otherA / paid
Mr.. Chittenden $500 for his services, and have
not seen him since until to DAY, whom I see him
here in Mr. SharD's emplOv.n
Mr. Chittenden objected to some of the an
swers made by Mr.. Knox. and, at Mr.. Conkling's
suggestion, volunteered to appear before the
committee and make certain statements
He said: about the last Of August, 1884
was employed by the opponents Of the Broadway
Railway Company. was told that Mr. Knox
was jealous in his opposition to that road AS
sisted by him secured an injunction against
the road, which was afterward dissolved. After
ward was asked whom my connection with MIR.
Knox had ceased Mr. Scribner Of the Arm of
Robinson, Scribner & Bright, asked me II hs
could secure my services for the Broad
way company: He said that the com
would be required. replied that, while the
company could not secure my services to assist
1t in covering up any corruption which might
exist. was willing to assist 1t in defending its
legal rights. We came to an agreement, and
was retained
Charles G. Beaman, Of the firm Of Evarts,
Choate & Beaman, who, during the fight for the
Broadway franchise appeared as counsel for a
number of property owners, gave, in brief and
succinot manner, history Of the case.
The committee then adjourned until Tuesday.
Fourteen of the aldermen Of 1881 were in attend
ance at the hearing to-day. Jacob Sharp and
James w. Foshay were also ia attendance
The Post says: "Still another story was to the
effect that Mr. Conkling was in possession of In
formation duplicating number Of men holding
high political positions. a. well as some members
Of the State Senate Of 1883 and 1884, who were
stroet-railway bill It IL said that the same
members who combined to defeat Mr.. Conk!ing
whom he was candidate for United States Sem
ator were in tho combination which secured the
passage Of the bill, and Mr.. Conkling has not
forgotten the way ia which he was treated