Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-07-29

YET As TO SMITHS REFUSAL TO TEsTIFY-MR.
cLAUoHroN OBJECTS TO CERTAIN PUBLIcA.
TroSs-w. PEARSON Examined.
At o'clock this afternoon the fourth day Of
Lieut. Guys trial began before the Distric,
Commissioner Some time before the hour SET
for the trial to begin an interested audience
began to gather in the board room and around
the open door and windows leading into
the main hallway, anxious to see what the
days investigation would bring forth in the
way of startling developments as to the
methods Of the police force.
Mr.. Douglass was the first Of the Commits
sioners to make his appearance, and had a
large palm-leaf fan in his hand. He took his
seat at the center Of the table with the inquiry:
''What Is the cause Of the procrastination OF
the rest Of this court?'
Col. Robert soon made his appearance, but
Mr.. Hins was not to be found and the opening
Of the court was delayed little while for him
to come in. Lieut.. Guy was promptness itself,
and took his usual seat at the left OF his coun-
sci, Mr.. Claughton.
THE REcALcIrnANT WITNESS SMITH.
The refusal of Robert e. Smith, the ex-police-
man. to give any testimony whatever when
called before the board yesterday created a
mild sensation, and numerous explanations and
vague rumors regarding his reticence were
floating around today, but none seemed to
know Just what it did mean. Commissioner
Douglass remarked to STAR reporter that
there was probably some good reason for 1t all,
but he did not know what it was nor what steps
would be taken to find out.
After waiting twenty minutes for Mr.. Hine
to arrive Mr.. Douglass suggested that the trial
might proceed without him. but Mr. Claughton
objected and said that he would prefer to wait
and have the case presented before the full
court. Mr. Hine soon entered the room aud
opened his watch, the hands Of which pointed
to 11:20. That was all he said, and the trial
began.
STATE SECRETS.
Mr.. Hazelton, the District attorney, at once
called Lieut.. Pearson, but Mr.. Claughton arose
and said:
Before we proceed desire to call your at
were yesterday 80 carefully guarded as
state secrets that ! could not
have them for the purpose of using them in
the cross-examination OF a witness for the gov
eminent, have been surreptitlously taken from
the Commissioners Office and appeared in full In
desire to have access to the printed
statements and to the statements
made by the witness Atchison.
and denied to me on the ground yesterday that
they were state secrets. Afterward person
by the name of Smith was called by the Com
swer any questions This morning what pur-
ports to be statement made by Smith to Col.
Robert is published in full.
"Of course have to conclude that the Com
missioners were sincere yesterday in the decla-
ration that they were regarded as state secrets
to which had no right to have access for the
purpose of cross-examination of
witness. say have to
conclude that they were sincere in that,
and therefore am forced to the other conclu-
sion that somebody has surreptitiously OBJ
tanned the statement made by Smith to Col.
Robert and caused it to be published.
''Of course, need not say that the unsworn
statement of witness Who when called to
swear to what he has said, declines to swear
to 1t, is of no value. Whoever had any
participation whatever in publishing
that unsworn statement in the face of the fact
respect to it during the progress Of this trial
OF Lieut. Guy has committed q serious offense
aud has done him great injury.
Il think the Commissioners ought to investi-
gate it and see who has caused this statement
to be made in the public prints"
NOTHING BUT SWORN STATEMENTS GO.
Mr.. Douglass said that the matter would be
taken under consideration, but that the case
would be tried solely on sworn testimony.
Mr.. Claughton said that the publication had
done his client much harm. as it had gone out
broadcast
Col. Robert stated that the papers had not
been in his possession for some time past and
that they had not been made public either with
his knowledge or consent
THE FIRST WITNESS
Charles w. Cramer was the first witness. rs
Lieut.. Pearson had not yet come, and he stated
that he was a policeman. and during the year
1888 he found John Hart the policeman, drunk
In the station house. He reported him to the
acting lieutenant and Hart was fined $40 by the
trial board.
LIEUT.. PEARSON EXAMINED.
Lieut.. Pearson was then called and sworn. He
said that he was lieutenant and now a night
inspector. He said that there was no record
Of Hosmer having reported Hart for being
drunk on his (Hosmer's) door step. He said
that there was no report made by Guy in any
OF the cases against Hart for intoxication and
neglect Of duty.
RECALCITRANT WITNESSES.
Considerable difficulty was now found in get
ting the government Witnesses and Mr.. Hazel
ton said that he had four witnesses under sub
penas, but that they were not present.
Mr.. Douglass asked what would be done in
the case of Smith and Mr.. Hazelton said that
he was convinced that Smith could not be
forced to testify nor be punished if he refused
to say nything.
Mr.. Douglass remarked that q case like this
was necessarily slow, but that some legislation
was needed to help the Commissioners to ex-