Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-03-22
CLAIMS OF THE DEFENSE.


An Attempt to Have the Case Thrown Ou,
on Legal Decentralization McKirdy
| Called to the Stand and Asked . Mum.
Der Of Questions.
The counsel for defendants opened by
raising the objection that the information
could not be sustained. on the ground that
five men cannot be jointly held on charge
of embezzlement, and on. the ground, that
there was no evidence to sustain the allega-
tions contained in the information. The
counsel for the defense here called John
McKirdy and asked him to be sworn for
| cross-examination to show the source of his
information as contained in the allegations
| of the information sworn to in the case.
This was objected to BY Mr. Patterson on
| the ground that the informant is simply the
| agent of the Commonw ealth in the making
of the information and not answerable to
the defendants asto the source of his infor-
nation, he not being compelled to tell from
| whence he obtained his information. and for
the further reason that the Commonwealth
having made out clearly prims facie case,
| the defendants are not to be permitted to
call on, the party making the information to
| give the grounds or source of his knowledge
of the facts contained in the information.
| The objection was overruled, and MI. Nc
Kirby sworn, the testimony being as fol-
lows
Q. Mr.. McKirdy, at whose instance did you
| make this Information?
| A. 1t my. own instance.
Q. Nobody asked you to make 1T
Why the Informafion Was Made.
A. made it as taxpayer and as one hav-
ing knowledge of the 1acts connected with
| the case.
Q. What knowledge have you of the facts
| connected with the case?
A How the money had been collected by
these people and had never been turned into
the City Treasury.
Q. That information was obtained from
| the testimony adduced by these defendants
on the trial Of the Pearson case in court,
was it not?
Q. You didn't hear their testimony as
given in that case?
A. No, sir; might have been present once
or twice, but didn't stay to hear the testi-
O. You certainly we're there, for 1 remem-
Der of seeing you there?
A. was there short time, but didn't
stay to hear the testimony.
Q. Who asked you to make this informa-
tion? ....,.
@. Then do you say that you didn't hear
the testimony of these defendants on the
Pearson trialH
A. Yes, sir: that is whatI say.
O. You did hear what they had testified to,
die you not?
A. believe 1 read the papers, Mr.. Fer
q. And you knew before you made this in
formation that they had testified that this
money was handed to the Chief of Police,
who kept it in a safe in the office?
A. No, can't say,I did.
O. And haven't you before making this
information made inquiries of any members
of the committee, or of Mr.. Hunter, the
Chairman of Councils, as to whether these
statements were correct?
A. No sir.
Q. Made no inquiry whatever?
The Letter of the Law.
A. No. sir; didn't think 1t was necessary.
In the presence of the ordinance, 1 didn't
think any understanding with regard to any
individual was necessary.
Q. Didn't You think it an important ques-
tion as to whether a man had been guilty OF
stealing. or whether he had misconstrued an
ordinance, or whether he misunderstood his
authority?
A. No, sir: it didn't strike me in that way,
because the city of Allegheny has City
Q. Didn't you know that the City Solicitor
had given an opinion to the effect that it
was proper for them to take these fees?
q. Did you talk to the City Solicitor about
A. He talked to me about it.
Q. Didn't he tell you not to make this in
formation and advise you against it?
A Headvised me against it.
Q. Did you go to any other attorneys about
A. No sir.
Q. Did you talk with Mr.. Langfit about it
during the trial or since?
A. can't recollect of seeing Mr.. Langfit
since that.
Q. You say the City Attorney advised you
not to make this informationf
A. Yes, sir; he came to me last Tuesday
evening week ago, after had gone before
the Mayor, and he advised me against it.
Q. On the ground that you had no case
against the defendants?
A don't know that he stated it in that
q. How did he state it?
A. He thought had done my duty a. an
auditor, and more than my duty, and ad-
viseu again st it.
q, pidn,s IS he say he didn't think You could
A. He thought wouldn't hold them, be-
lieve.
Murphy Again on the Stand.
John r. Murphy, examined by Mr.. Fergu-
son-I am one of the defendants in this case
Q. You got the money on those of these
warrants where your name appears indorsed
on the back of the warrants?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now tell US what you did with that
A. That money which collected handed
over to the Chief of Police, Simon Kirschler.
Q. Did you get any under Mayor Wyman's
administration?
A. Yes, sir.
@. What did you do with that, and with
the money You got under the Pearson ad-
ministration?
A. Used it for Office expenses.
Q. Just tell the magistrate what you and
the other front of1ce men did with the
money you got on these warrants,
A. would like to tell you about that ordi
nance in the first place. AT the time of this
ordinance we were getting 81 a day and
all docket costs: what we used to call docket
costs; these costs we would get every month
for serving warrants and subppnas, etc.
At the time this ordinance was passed we
were told we would get g Is per day and no
fees from the city; but that this did not in
clude the county ices. We asked about this
and were told that we could go ahead col
lecting the county fees So we went on col
lecting these fees and put it in what we
called the pool; that with other money.
And we used that for office expenses, IL we
had to go out of the city. or had to goany
where.
Q. Was any of 1t used for your personal
expenses?
Not Enough4or Expenses
A. No, sir. There was not enough Of this