Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-05-16
JAEHNE ON THE STAND.
ALL KNOWLEDGE OF BRIBERY
Positively DENIED.

Gen. Pryor VainlY Endeavors 10
Have the Indictment Quashed--
Pleas that the Confession to Iu-
spectOr Byrnes Was Obtained by
BrOwbcating and Intimidation
The District Attorney and In-
spector Charged With Crooked
ness.
NEW YORK, May 15.--The trial OF ex-
Alderman Jaehne was continued to-day.
Counsel for the defense asked that the
testimony OF Inspector Byrnes aud De-
tectiye Cosgrove as to the alleged confess
siOns OF the defendant be stricken ont on
the ground that they were made under the
inducement OF hopes and pressure Of feaa y
The motion was denied.
Detective Rogers testified that he heard
Jaehne's confession made to Inspector
Byrnes. This story was substantially the
same as that Of Inspector Byrnes.
John Scott testified that George w.
Alter, Alderman Jaehne's former clerk,
told him that the "boodle" had been kept
in Jaehne's safe over night. When he left
the witness stand the District Attorney
announced that the prosecution rested.
Counselor John Graham, for the defense,
hhpNNu Nhab Ahb lhWlCAAuEUh NC us Aulbhtue
as the grand jury had been trIcked into
making false presentment. 1t was a
fraudulent record, and should be quasned..
GEN. PRYOR's ARGUMENT.
Gen. Pryor, in support OF the notion.
argued that the grand jury really did
know the name OF the alleged briber.l
although describing him as unknown
that Is, knew that Inspector Byrnes knew
It, and wilfuliy abstained from obtaining
that name from him. He argued that the
indictment should be dismissed on the
ground that it was not based on sufficient
evidence.
Judge Barrett denied the motion, saying
that the ground upon which the motionl
was based, that the grand jury had been,
tricked into finding an Indictment, was
a most extraordinary and unwarranted
one. In refraining from insisting upon
obtaining all the evidence in INSPECTOR
Byrnes' possession, they acted in the in-
terest of public justice. All the evidence
showed that Mr.. Maloney was not the
briber, but merely the hand through
which the bribery was committed.
OTHER GROUNDS.
Gen. Pryor further moved the dismissal
OF the Indictment on the ground that there
was no evidence OF the receipt Of a prom
Use or agreement TO receive the bribe, and
that no evidence that IT had beer received
In this county was adduced. This also
was denied.
Counsellor Newcomb, for the defense,
took the line OF argument that the Dis
trict Attorney and Inspector Byrnes had
attacked Alderman Jaehne to save them
solves from punishment for compounding
a felony, and that Alderman Jaehne's
bondsmen had been intim dated by the
police into surrendering him.
The defense would admit the con fessiOn
TO Inspector Byrnes and he would also
tell why it was made. Thomas w. Byrnes.
and not the defendant, was the man who
had most at stake in this trial.
JAEHNE ON THE STAND.
Alderman Jaehne was put upon the
stand as a witness in his own behalf. His
acquaintance with Byrnes began In 1892,
and had since then become intimate.
"Did you ever receive a promise OF
money" Alderman Jaehne was asked,
''for your vote on the Broadway railway
II never did in my life," was the an
swer.
''Did you ever ask a reward for such
voter"
"I never did"
"Dld any person ever give you OF offer
you any money for such voteT
''Never."
"AIter you 0d0 VOteO IN IAVOF OF Lna
Broadway railroad franchise did anyona
ever give you any money for such voter
They never did"
WHY HE VOTED FOR 1T.
"Had you at any time any conversations
with any one in regard 10 the payment to-
you OF any money for such a vote? 2"
~ never did"
"Why did You vote for such a fran-
chsew was next asked, and the witness
replied that he had cOnyersed with
number Of merchants on Broadway,
owners Of property there and others, and
had come TO the conclusion that IL would
be q benefit TO Broadway and the public
generally, and that was his only reason
Tor voting for 1t.
BYRNEs' STORY CoNTRADIcTED.
Coming down TO the testimony Of In
spectOr Byrnes in regard TO sew
eral alleged conversations with
the defendant, In which he was
alleged to have acknowledged hav-
ing received money for his vote on the
Broadway railroad, the witness denied,
categOrically and emphatically, every
allegation in regard TO the meeting AZ
Inspector Byrnes' house. Alderman
Jaehne told a totally different story OF
what he said to Inspector Byrnes from
that testified to by Inspector Byrnes aud
Detectives Cosgroye and Rogers. The
case WAS closed and given 10 the jury,
which went out at II O'Clock tonight.
FRND GUILTY.
NEW YORK, May 10, 1 80 A. NAT l:lN
o'clock sunday morning the jury returned
"A verdict of guilty.