New-York tribune., 1890-03-23
| the Jail? A.-No. He lived in the Jail and auenced

kind about the 1all. A.-No
Q.WhO did the work of cleaning ule JAN A'-i"o
United States prisoners .,..u ,.oo.i,x ,,o. -, .,o
salary list OF the city Of New York as cleaner Ut
Ludlow Street Jail at 500 month Al dld not
QpG .D3c5t yo" in N%T conma College should be on the
salary list of the city of New orh at go month
O.-What' A.-(Drskly) sixty dollars a month.
Great laueherQ 49,. .., -. -. ..o,.. ,,o.
was paid by stayncr and yourself TO the warden was
paid TO the city. and how much Kept by himself A.
food Tor the prisoners. The sheriff reimbursed
by the city for all those who could not pay and by
the people who could pay for what they had
Mr. Clark-Would YOU favor bill aboli-hns I'M
prisonment for debt a. with hcstauoninNo' SIR
Alexander Bumenstcl. of the firm of Blnmen-
stiel & llrsch. said that he had had slcab
deal of experience with the Sheriff : ONCE. AS
an instance he told what had happened IN the
case of Nicol. Cowlishaw a Co., in which he
had been attorney. in a process involving SJoo'-
600. There were two sales, and 81 10000 or - Oo
600 was realized. lie understood that the process
was in the hands of Jere" Burns who was acting
for Under-Shcrin Sexton. Mr.. Boardman asked
O.-Was an auctionecr empoycdl A-ies, Mr..
o~Was a bill presented after the salc' A.-YeS
auconcers fees charged against y then thc baianCe
then the charges Of the sheriff. Including poundaec
C.-IIow much were the auctioncers fees A,Liie III,
demanded per ce7i Of the proceeds allowed MI"
Q-How much rprc.cnted disbursements bv Nr.
Topping and how much to mn 300 ior no 10
81 900 represents disbursements. ~ - A.. .ro
oDd Mr. Topping at any time tel ',1 yGq ha tna' anS Ie
r1c%S'' mony wa, cictcd here WV
Q-Whcn the bill given to YOU. was az!
written after the word compensatory Any
recollection is IL $1,000. ,,o
Q.-Nou did not suggest that in the hrSt in>ttn'v'
did youl Ave didn't suggest compensation at all
dLaughterJ We cut that bill down to Sl.5Oo ,.o,
Q.-Can You tell us approximately how much none
your office paid ont for auctionecrs fees durin- tc
las; five years A.-From $4,000 to S-5OoO YER. u
] would not have allowed the sheriff any conpens anon
Il had known about the division Of anconcer' crs
Under the provision OF the code an oic'' WHO eNa
more than legal fees is liable 10 pay three tunes tlo
o.~You feel Justified. under the colc. as a hwycr
in bringing an action against the sheriff T. rcove th
amount or three time, that amount receVed 10y 'icF'n
Grant. half of the auctionecra fec, A-IhcTe Il
10 question about ;lsi
The witness declared cmphatically that there
was a very dangerous power in the Shcri $
office: because a deputy sheriff could hold back
the return of an execution for the advantage oi
his favorIteS. Supposins, he snd' deputy
favors a man who gels an execution retnricI
ahead of mine. the deputy prevents ne rom ee'-
ting hen. and my vigilance is defeated by the
mere faVoritisn of the deputy. go
Do you know Of any such case ne was
on. he replied. bills have been filed ahead
of Us. and we have filed bills ahead OF others
~Trartically. can any lawyer do the business
that you do without being on good terms Win
the Sheriff ?"
hat is absolutely essential
Mr. Blumcnsticl added that he was decidedly
in favor of making the Sheriff a saaried oihclal
and Of appointing deputies on approval oil me
courts 10 certain specified districts ne POM
about the whole matter Is. sald ne. tha' me "'i>
of tho Sheriff slonld be verified like every o'hcl
bin. thai it should bc taxed. and then hed WIN
the clerk of the court whence the process WIS
J. J. Adams. lawyer and formerly Congress,
man testified in an acrid manner that lie h,i
suffered in case in which ne was 'on'c',, ~" ~
the partalN shown by ccr MniS'rsS TO- "ano,hcr
fellow. Nr Adams said that IN a
case where he had executions oil Sl''V,TTD
and 5000 Mr Mulyaney held them pacN. ,''
c0mpaiued 10 Mr.. sexton. mo ordered ll'" 80
De returned. The $1,000 execution ""S ic' '.,'i'.'
and the other was held back Mcanwmlc jH'-
ment Tor - 10000 was put IN me >hcilh i.'luS.
and within five or SIX minutes that execution was
returned for $4,000 and Nh Adams was cut
Did you pay Mulvancy.? ?" he was WAS asked. lsgc
=" would rot pay him. was the reply.
Tho witness said that he was IN foNor "i me
passage OF a bill 10 compel the Sheriff upon 'nr
written request Of plalntin : attorney - 4'','
all executions Immediately: or ~" pAssaSc "i -
hiil auov,ioc a Judgment creditor 70 bring an
eoritv action before the return Of tie execution
C,corsc = Pla't. "A lumber broker. "'~ arrested
SheIin "a NE 'WcGonigai @ Mr Part managed 20 get
bail For his services I'm going around WIN nm
~cekine for bail NcGoni.al cnnI9rH
witness protested. bat hai'Ica so 10 Mr''onle'.
in thc S.crin's Office McGor.eal handed INN
Wly didn't YOU walk right ont without pay
Ing the money ?~ asked Mr. Boardnan.
Z" ] didn't know rs much ns kno" nov;
Frarcis j. Burns assis'rui 10 DcpHif Nh'rif
Joel o. Stevens. said hc cil mps' o. Ni Sc, ''
work Mr. Stevens was IN old man ana i'l "'N
.icl, lately lie thought Nr Biumcnsf.cl Nas ms
taken in saving that 5000 was cnaiecH l.r
conversation iu the case Of NIcol, 'oWNoH'" {"
Co. I!c generally allowed me a"ycI> - ',> 1',.
co,npcnsation Sometimes a lawyer increased rs
hin lie would ask the wiinc.s how hlch h"
wanted and # the witness said so 1s IN one 'nN
mai he remembered The lawyer replied " thlnN
Vamc one lawyer who did that" said Mr
RoardInan. ,
Il think there was Mr. Dewlins' who used
70 bc i'm Broadway al one TINE
is he dead
p H. McNamcc told Of tho case Of Mr flh-
tboruc 1yho when under arrest from - lf'.t
~ a Tuesday. had paid something like 80" w.
| fcnYf, ,ic~iite ..rd VINO had been arrested again
lafcr. and had then 10 pay So DAY. for piiF-
: Knecland. a lawyer who has had business
with the Shcrins Office testified mat }" had paiI
| $40 600 or 1000 for auctionccis fees d"ilA-
| Sheriff Grants administration u" had moi hi""h
| that the sheriff got half Of ! lo,c Ices
Vr Roardman asked: Would you consider
| thai thai was simply robbery Of your client
Il would consider if ! had ARRANGED WIN an
onc,ioncrr 10 nav him g. 800 or $4,000 under
the snpposition that was P,N"H 'hu
for hi, services when bali 81 II
went in another direction. that "r had pcei'
cuchrcd ont of 50 much monc' IT,,
william J. Campbell. another la~rcr. was = li'G
! IN tho stand CORPORATION Counsel Clark "'lcctcd
! 10 his examination on flc ground o. His con
| rcction with suits pending against Mr. Grant.
! and Senator Fasectf said that lc Won 2iNr NJ"
| decision in thc case until Senator MrNaughton
| could be consulted.
sion. will meet again tomorrow in the Court OF
| Common Pleas.