The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1886-11-20
THE BOODLERS.
The Trial Of Alderman Me-
Quade in New York.
INTERESTING STATEMENTS
FaIgrET. the Repsntant BoodIer,
Tells What He Knows OF the
ReekinK ROttenness
still Trying BoodIemen.

NEW YORK, November 19.-The trial
of ex- Alderman Arthur J. McQuade, the
indicted boodleman, was continued this
morning II a crowded court room.
Nichol conducted the examination.
Ex-Alderman Charles B. Waite re-
sumed the witness chair. He ac-
knowledged several visits to the Office of
the Broadway Surface Railway Com
pany. and 10 seeing Maloney there. The
witness came to New York several
times in August, 1886, he being in New
London, Conn, in business and at the
Seq1Ot House at that time. On August
29th of that year, he was summoned TO
New York by telegraph.
General Tracy here objected TO the
reading of the telegram.
The witness continued, saying he went
to the BrevOOrt House and met James
Richmond. After that be came
down town and IN passing
through the court house to the
Bright was with Richmond. one of them
gave him paper. The paper was pro
'uced IN court AID identified by the
witness. This occurred August 80
Witness then went up TO the aldermen's
chambers. Witness said the telegram
was 20 notify him of a meeting. He
presided at the meeting of the board.
The Mayors veto message on the fran
Chise was read, and the bill was passed
over the veto. The meeting was held
with closed doors; except the members
o. the board no one vas present but J.
francis Herman, newspaper man.
Witness did not know whether Nc
Quade was present or not, or who
drafted the resolution To pass the bill
over the veto.
The cross examination elected the
fact that the resolutions were in type
writing, according to the result OF the
previous consultation of the aldermen.
The report of the railway committee
was prepared in the office Of Scribner Il
Bright, as was also the resolution in
type-wr;ting.
x-Alderman Fullygraf was now
called as q witness. He affirmed.
Witness had resided in New York and
Brooklyn thirty-siX years, and had
been in business twenty-six years.
He Is a big headed man, with
q moustache and a tuft of cnin
whiskers. He sat with mis- eyes closed
and his hands clasped upon his lap.
The witness SAID an informal meeting
was held in May, 1886, after the board had
adjourned; eight or nine members were
present, OF which McQuade was one.
The subject discussed was the fact that
Ii was necessary to have thirteen votes
20 pass the bill. 1t was agreed TO meet
in the Office of the witness. Within a
week after this was done, and 4 meeting
was held IN Fullgraf's factory, after
business hours. This was before the
bill was passed. Thirteen aldermen
were present. McQuade was one of
them.
Nichol asked who also were present.
Witness named from memory Kin
ney, Sayles, Waite, McCabe, Duffy and
Jaehne. Mclaughlin was chairman DE
Lacey was present. Il was agreed that
the thirteen members present would
hold together on aly question that
came before the board. Nothing was
said about the Broadway Railway. 1t
was agreed TO meet sgsin one week
later at McLaughlin's house. Witness
attended the latter meeting. Nc
Laughlin was made chairman again
On Duffy's motion. a The irst business
was the question of the Broadway Rail
way franchise. 1t was said that other
companies, the Cable road and otherss
wanted the franchise. Jaehne, DeLscy
and others spoke, saying that the
Broadway Cable Road Company, had
offered $3.50, 600. for the frabchise. one
half cash and one-half bonds. Witness
did not know TO whom the money and
stock we're to go. 1t was said that the
surface road had offered $500, 900 cash.
Witness said the offer OF the
cable road was considered unre-
liable and the other was considered good,
but 1t was decided to accept the offer of
the Broadway Surface road by unani-
nous vote. Witness voted for 1t. The
next question discussed was who should
be entrusted with the money. Some
thing was said about the amount;
SD 900 was 10 90 to each member. One
member thought the amount should be
S25 900 each; 1t was said the lawyers
had, concluded to pay only SD 900.
That amount was decided upon unani-
mouslv. McQuade voted. Another
meeti1g was held at McLaughlin's
house. but only twelve out of the thir-
teen were present. Thesquestion dis
cussed was to select q member to hold
the money. Witness thought McCAbe
said Nalonev might not be trusted with
so large an amount. Duly suggested
Keenan,. and ne was selected. DeLacey
then said be wished 20 have the mem
bers present 20 TO Keenan, to assure him
IL was all right. Witness said the posi-
bilitv OF veto was considered and IN
case il was decided 10 leave the work oil
getting a AMO L4AAA@ VIC ~ -41Ao-AIF
After the veto another meeting was
held at McLsughlin's house to discuss
il. As more votes were necessary II
was decided unanimously TO cut down
each mans share 70 $4,000. Witness
said he saw MOlOneY at his house
August 29th. and the latter brought
witness q psper to sign. There were
several other names on 'he paper; the
witness then testified to the. paper
as the one he signed. II
was a call for the memorable
meeting OF August S0th. The witness at
tended the secret meeting OF August
3Oth. McQuade and witness were both
present at another meetingIn McLa1gh-
Inns house, October 18th. There had
been no money paid yet, and this was
the subject OF discussion. Witness re
ceived 2 para lS5.050l. before the election,
that was due. The final vote granting
the franchise was taken December 5th