Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1889-02-28
THOSE AWFUL 0ATHS
On DR.. Maharneke's Part Officially
Alluded to by J. B. Scott
MALETTER 10 THE STATE BOARD.
The Money That Passed Among Prisoners a
Matter of No Moment.
ELECTRICITY PAINFUL, BUT HARMLESS.

Yesterday. Mr. James B. Scott, one of the
local members of the State Board Of Chari-
ties made report to that body on the re-
cent investigation at the Western Peniten-
tiary. The board met at Harrisburg, when
the following paper was submitted:
PITTsBURG. February Q, 1889.
Totbe Board Of Public Charities:
CONDENSATION members, resident in
Allegheny City, Pa, were recently apprised by
the Board of Inspectors of the Riverside Prison
of certain charges preferred by Prisoner James
McPhillamy against the hospital steward Of
the prison, B. B. Maharneke, and were specially
requested to be present at the investigation to
be made into the correctness of sald charges.
The investigation was held and continued on
the afternoons and evenings of Tuesday,
Thu ursday and Friday the 5th. 9TH and Sth in
slant The charges made against the steward
were contained in previous affidavit Of the
prosecutor, and were found to consist of three
in number.
First-Alleged collusion of Maharneke with
prisoners to assist in effecting escape.
Second-Cruelty to patients in hospital
Third-Accepting money as bribes from prls'
oners land general corruption.l
In the process Of the investigation the widest
Adlltuut was pCtlu4bkCA DObh cAuCci 0AN - 'N-S
large proportion of the evidence offered was
entirely irrelevant; but it was thought better to
allow much that was not related to the case to
enter, rather than to enable anyone to insist
that anything pertinent to the case had been
refused.
From the peculiarity of the circumstances
and persons, it is no easy task to winnow the
grains of truth from the enormous quaHtity of
chat, or to make the proper allowance for the
manifest animus characterizing large proper
tion of the evidence offered.
Regarding the first charge, there is not the
slightest evidence supporting the statement In
the affidavit of the prosecutor. His own COM
rade in the attempted escape testified that he
had never spoken to Maharneke, nor had been
addressed by Maharneke on the subject of the
escape, nor had McPhillamy at any time init
mated to him that Maharneke was associated in
any way with the adventure.
JUST A LITTLE PAINFUL.
Regarding the second charge, viz, cruelty.
1t is proper here to state that, in the hospital
there were the usual appliances of straight
jackets for use upon incorrigible cases, many
of them of moral taint, and these ap-
pear to be the only appliances of any kind in
use. The physician in charge had No. Nc
Intosh Faradic battery, used ia connection with
medical treatment, and frequently in the way
Of test of cases considered as "shamming."
Its value in connection with medical treatment
is without dispute.
As to Maharneke personally, it is evident
that he was person of impulsiye and excita-
bic temperament and given to occasional out
bursts Of temper, accompanied with profanity
He does not seem TO have been "cruelh man
nor given at any time to 'acts of cruelty" toward
patients or others under him. The only cases
of cruelty testified to were those perpetuated by
the very witness testifying thereto. The state
ment, as made. seemed incredible even If the
actions reported were the result of instructions
of Maharneke, as insisted upon by the witness
In the case where the witness describes that
tsthe flesh was taken off the man" by the use
OF broom while in the bath room, he after
ward alludes to the notice by the Inspector
'that the mans face was scratched at one
time,n butno complaint OF any further injury
was made by the patient himself or notice
given by any other person, the inspector giving
warning that such acts as the scratching might
not recur.
IN the treatment of incorrigible patients it
9, oed apparent that Maharneke had used the
battery referred 70 as a means of subjecting
them to the discipline, which thsf resented,
11S snd sIsPc' an wt musnous
sistance on the part Of such persons, has ap-
piled it with severity productive Of much pain,
although without danger to the patient
There is no evidence whatever of anything
approaching systematic cruelty on the part of
Maharneke; but we do not justify the harsh
ness or severity which Maharneke no doubt,
visited upon some OF the patients when exas-
perated By their continual resistance to orders.
MONEY o. K, BUT oATHs AWFUL.
Regarding the third charge: The principal
testimony was given by Prisoner Hall, whose
statement is TO the effect that on several occa-
sions small amounts of money were given to
Maharne1e by him, sometimes for the pur-
pose of securing articles for the prisoner. and
in almost every case either the money or the
goods were returned to the witness. The oc-
casions were widely separate as to date and the
amounts were small, and he thought possibly
there might have been "a few dollars that he
did not get"
The prosecutors statement as to the payment
of large amounts of money to Mal-arneke at
various times was to have been corroborated
by the witness Robinson; but his testimony
was only to tie effect that McPhillamy was
possessed of certain sums of money, and that
he had heard McPhillamy say that be had
given Maharneke money; but he personally
knew of no such transaction. Robinson
further testifes that Mop Phillamy told him that
he could have most of the amount in case of q
certain political result Ia virtual bet on the
electionl; but how the cash could be given to
Maharneke and also retained as a bet was not
stated.
1t is but fair to the defendant to state that
he unequivOcally denied the statements of the
witnesses for the prosecution in every particu-
lar where they imputed to him any acts of in
territorial cruelty or,of money transactions in
which he was interested. He stated, that while
prisoner himself, money may have passed be-
tween his comrades and himself but since his
release and engagement as hospital steward
that he had been absolutely free from entan-
clements of any kind.
On general principles it is apparent that it
was mistake for the management to select an
ex-convict for position of even seeming au-
rhority over those who had been his comrades
as his insistence upon the proper rules and reg
ulations Of the prison would naturally be re-
sented by men in their position and by his
former associates; but it is recognized that this
action was in the line of encouragement and
assistance to prisoners. which is one of the
principal elements in the argument of those
giving special attention to the science of pen
ology.
The foregoing was written after close of in
vestigation and prior to final consideration and
decision by the Board of inspectors of the
prison. This decision was made on the even
ing of February 81 and orders the discharge of
Maharneke from his position as hospital Stew
ard.
Respectfully submitted.
JAMES B. SCOTT,
Member of Board.
A Trust That is No Monopoly.