New-York tribune., 1890-06-01


equally without knowledge Of the doings of his depu
ties He said he had man looking out after iheh''
but IL did not appear that the ever told nm any
thing lie procured from his counsel statement oI
all the fees that could be charged for each service
and this statement he had posted up in the oiicc IN
sructing his deputies to conform 10 IT, According 10
this schedule, IT appeared to be his counSeFs OPINION
that If the parties agreed to it, extra compensation
came within the statutory provisions N uh'
of persistent inquiry, it appeared that extra compc
sation' was the given to sum of money "li'h
the Sheriff did not actually demand of anybody but
which everybody made TO understand he "ouIu
better pay he wanted his future business ATTENDED
to. In word. IL simple cxtortion. The patrons
of the Sherif's Office mostly lawyers acting IoI
creditors. The debtors goods and effects are taken
by the Sheriff in due process Of law and sold Tor 'e
benefit Of the creditor. The law allows the shenH
for these services certain fees. expressly deihed,
10 be charged against the creditor The business "'
course, was transacted by the Sheriff or his deputy
with the creditors lawyer. Under sheriff Grant az
processes of less amount than 100000 were atehu''
10 by his deputies and he shared the proitS WIN thc
All of over that amount he attended to himself taking
all the profits Now in making out their hliis dsinN
the creditor his attorney the shcTii or his uepuN
as the case might be, would charge first, the iees
distinctly allowed by law. and tlen one OF Ho''
those other fees designated extra compchSa'"h'
auctOneer's fees" charged in case the eoous "o'o
actually sold) and keepers fees charged in case
charges were not expressed in figures They NeT'
written out and the amounts were left blank. Inc
lawyer on whom the bill was served would HI "l."i
/ I'm for whatever he willing to give an" wi,
Grants contention that, although the IL" VI"
not expressly authorize such collections thcY 'f"c
within the statutory provisions the parties "-c'
to Them" The exact amount collected 10y nun anu
his men in this way can never be khoWE p''''' ''
the bills were promptly DESTROYED but 1t must h"N'
been between $4,000 and 100000. Inc la'' "'''
1t was not within the statutory provisions requires
no other evidence than that soon a. II became
known 20 the public generally law was passed Al
Albany making its acceptance crime, 80 th'' -'"
York has "a Mayor who would be sent to state lriSo
If he were TO do today what he did with inpuliN i'll
1856.
The moral character of the offence was su'h"-N
shown when the committee examined lawyer N"'
had submitted to these cxtOrtion~ and who SiH ''''
did 80 because it would be impossible {" 90 bl~l''
without being Oh good terms with the Sheril anu 'u'
men. II they disputed these extra charge 'h'"
processes were thereafter neglected and they ana thc
clients involved IN loss.
/ In all his testimony about this subject Mr. Grant"
answers were uneasy attempts at evasion "hrh con
froned with the law he at once ran to cover i'"''
his advice VI counsel" his statutory proVi-i'''
A particularly bad state Of affairs wa shown 20 eN'N'
with regari 70 the "auctioneers fec,.T The law sup
poses that the $50 900 year which u ha> cs"IlS
provided for as the sheriff. net income Will amply
cover his services Us an auctionecr. But MAYOR
Grant adopted the system Of appointing an an'u"'''
to serve rs "a deputy giving him the right u mako
charges for his services, the proceed, o "h'h "''
to be equally divided between himself and the a"'
tionoer He told the committee that he had mo- means
whatever of ascerainine how much money had been
taken I'm AS auctoneers' fees. The auctonccr- VII"
had served under him made ont in vague Way U'''
their half had reached the sum OF S''ooo' 1le e''
the other half. Mr.. Alexander Bumcnsue "I tue
law firm of BIumcnscl 4 Ilirsch. testified that MS
,ao 80 fG I'D year e.
Sheriff upon this charge. Tho sum total Is thu- shown
TO he very large 1t was large that Mr. Grant
though quite content 10 pocket his own hail. rcinHc
his auctionccrs to share their half with ~ Alderman
Kirk 10 whom he indebted for political SERVICES
Kirh upon hi, own testimony. did practically noi i"-
70 earn his share. AuctiJncc: smith told tae com
mittoe that Grant had told him plainly That krA
had To be taken care Of
These revelations. made in the Mayors own eVi
dence and supplemented and heightened Dy the Con
trollcr's records and by other oral testimony, were
followed by shocking disclosures Of official m-conduc
In Ludlow street Jail TIL, jail IS uscd a. the place
Of confinement Of United states pr,oncr- and Of state
prisoners arrested upon civil process charging fraud
! In the procurement OF money or goods. II l- under
| the sherns direct management and control H'
appoints the warden who takcs care Of il ana u
deputies who make arrests. The warden under sheriff
Grant was James F. Kcatnr. The order n arrest
clerk was Barney Martin, at present Dcputy Com
missioner Of Public Works and member Of the Tam
many Hall General Committee. Among the dcpntc,
were Iasrck Fitzgerald. Ihllp Y. Nal-h. tAarlr.
! Lndcrnann. Charles h. Hiboad, Jane, Young. ana
a man named McConisal Each OF thee person. ""r
shown 10 have accepted grauitics from prisoners for
favors entirely inconsistent with their posi-
ton prisoners. Charlie g. Frmohyn i'~
titled that during his confinement OF SIX days At
the suit Of his cousin, sr Ha"he Cunnrd. upon the
charge Of fraud In the use of s3.oOO,OOo conid.d
to him for Investment. he had paic 800 20 Martin.
Walsh and Yourg, for permission to vi,i' D. c'u,''-
Office and his home. In fact. though uomiuab in
jail, he spent the most Of his time out-dc and the
$50 went into thse fellows' pocActs for that prvI-
lcgc
Henry s. Ives and his partner stayner swor' that
they had paid Warden Kcatlng over 10000 for the
/ fivors shown 10 them during their !mpr -onmeH
! upon the notorious charge, stl hanging over them.
/ Ives arrested at noon on SATURDAY, hu hc
did not 20 10 aii untl the following Monday night
There he had private and a private table. %
| servant and practically his liberty. for which hc
paid $3.50 "A week A. his fund, gave ont. te''
uxuries were curtailcd, until D.. paving bu go
d week for SO worth Of advantage over other lc,e
wealthy scoundIo.. Other Wltuc-.o, testified i"
other extnrtlOns paid 10 other deputic, II also
proved that stephen keating the warden, -on ihe1
| attending college, was carried on the Ci - pay
roll at 500 a month a clclncr7 though hc
did work whatever to earn his salary All thi'
went during an administration Of the sheriff
Office 0hich at lts close hcld mp to the cltl ~
especially mcrltOrious and emitting II, head 10
| promotion TO the MayOralty-an administration 81
| which Mayor Grant has the audacty 10
| say that II waS " The clcaicat IN a quarter OF Il
century," If 1t dGsrvod that distinction, ~haa
must have been going during the Of the time!
| It at this point in the investigation th't
| Patrick II. Mccain. lance In hand made his fell
| charge upon Mayor Grant and Richard Croker. 1he
| wives Of McCann and Croker sisters. Mc'ann'
after series Of business vcssiiudcs h,d become the
! purchaser Of hotel lease, Mount ~. Vincent
city property hold by the Park Department. lh'
| original lcSsecs were Croker and ;trOihcr man.
! Mccain bought them out, paying Croker by can
ceiling a long column Of debts which he had hoId