Morning journal and courier., 1892-04-08

errimeRt to the spectators.
"Well, you do know that you work for
r. Marlin, don't you!" asked Judge Stod-
ard, amid much laughter.
lido" replied the witness.
Judge Stoddard then asked the witness
sveral other questions, but was unable to
btain any Ineligible replies. ooh, well,
hats all" said Judge Stoddard, and the
fitness stepped down and out.
JOHN J. BRENNAN.
The next witness, John J. Brennan, tes-
fled: IT am assistant superintendent of
treets. A number of permits for opening
Itreets were issued by me during 1891, but
do not think that Mr.. Waldron was in
;he Office at the time. Mr.. Waldron
used to return to the Office about
$50 o'clock after dinner. Some.
times it was as late as $3.50 o'clock, but it
was very rarely that he was much later
than $50 o'clock. He was seldom there at
The hour prescribed by the rules, l:3O
o'clock, and then seldom stayed there.
got it fixed in my mind to expect him any
time from 2 to $50 o'clock. nearly al
ways awaited his return before going out
on the street. do not know at what time
he went to dinner. When I was first ap-
DIV house and he told me to look out for
the sidewalks, and then he told me to go
to Mr.. Waldron for instructions. do
not know that anything was said to me by
him about waiting for him to return from
dinner, but he told me to be at the office
at 1 o'clock to relieve Mr.. Hill. A very
few times Mr.. Waldron was 80 late that
was compelled to lock the Office up and go
away. I reported the matter to the presi-
dent of the board, Mr.. States, and to Su-
perintendent Doyle because I was com
PEELED to neglect my own work"
On cross examination the witness ac-
knowledged that neither of the complaints
were made in writing, and that the issuing
of the permits to which he referred was
only the filing them out. The witness
also stated that the period covered by Mr..
Waldron's alleged delinquencies was al
most the entire time for the past two years,
with short intervals when he came earlier.
The witness continued: Immediately
after the rule was passed regulating the
hours of the clerk he came in about TWEEN
ty minutes of two, then about 2 o'clock,
and gradually dropped back again to his
old time, 2:3O o'clock. l am aware that
part of this time Mr.. Waldron WAS under
the docror's care, but did not 80 state on
my direct testimony. I have continued to
issue permits during March and April this
year since Mr.. Bassett has been clerk,
precisely the same as when Mr.. Waldron
was clerk, except az to the hours"
The witness was then shown two per-
mits, which he acknowledged he had made
out, on one of which, No. 1913, the time
was marked as 1870 p. M, and the other,
No. 1, $40, at 3:43 pm.
Mr.. Hamilton then for the second time
took the witness in hand, and in reply to
queries the witness stated that on March
90, when the second permit was issued, or
about that time, the clerk of the board,
Mr.. Bassett, was absent by permission of
the board in consequence of the death of
his father. He also stated that Mr.. " al
dron signed up the permits and that he
(the witness) received the money and de-
livered the permits to the applicants.
In reply to questions by Judge Stoddard
the witness said: permits were issued on
March and by me for Mr.. Bassett."
ANTHONY CARROLL DESIRES TO BE HEARD.
At this point petition from Anthony
Carroll was presented to the court by Al
derman T. B. Kelly of the Seventh ward.
This petition asks that the petitioner be
given an opportunity to be heard in the
matter now before the court. Alderman
Kelly made strong plea for the granting
of the petitioners prayer, but the board
voted not to hear Mr.. Carroll by vote OF
Is to s, the attorneys for each side abso.
lutely refusing to question the witness if
permission were granted.
MR. WHITING.
The next witness called WAS Edwin R
Whiting, who said: 81 have lived in the
city practically all my life. I at one time
about September, 1889, received an orde,
from Mr.. Waldron in reference to the re
moval of certain fence located on property
on the proposed extension of Dewitt street
This order was signed board of public
works, by F. Fl. Waldron, clerk. There
was no order ever issued by the board, OF
at least Mr.. Todd, Mr.. Leigh and possibly
one other told me that they knew nothing
of any such order being issued. I never
removed the fence and since that time
have heard nothing more of It,"
GAS understand it then, Mr.. Whiting
you were ordered to remove your fence
from private property and refused to dc
500" asked Mr.. Stoddard on cross-examina
ton.
81 do not 80 understand any sucl
thing, but far off from it," replied tn.
W1Gness 8lnlO laughter.
HENRY w. MANSFIELD.
Henry w. Mansfield, the next witness
said: "There is no truth in the statemen,
made by exCity Engineer Hill that in tn
suit of Mr.. Eaton VS.. Mansfield I with
drew the suit. I was defendant in tina
| suit and could not withdraw it. The sui
was over pipe connecting with sewe
| on Mansfield street. The suit was com
menced in October, 1889. Mr.. Hill met M
| about the time the suit was commenced
Mr.. Hill said at the time that he had or
dered a nine-inch pipe and that had lai'
a six Inch. I then brought out my bill
he was mistaken and drove off. Later MI
Hill in court testified that he had ordere
me to lay twelve-inch pipe an
that 1 had laid nine-inch pipe
This testimony was given in tn
afternoon, and the court adjourned unit
next morning, when the case was droppe
without my knowing anything about it 0
without my changing my pipe. Since tina
time I have not changed the pipe. NJ,
Hill was always there when the case wa
in progress, but how much time he so oc
cupied cannot tell"
On cross examination by Judge Stod
dard: 81 have not the pleadings Of the dc
Tense in the case with me, nor copies Q
them. The other side alleged that the pip
which I put in was too small to carry Of
the water. My defense was that I put il
exactly what the city had ordered me t.
put in. The case was settled for the othe
side by my agreeing with Mr.. Alling, tn
counsel, to pay my proportion for catcl
basin, but absolutely refused to chang
my pipe"
The agreement between the parties t.
the suit was then read and offered in evi
dence and marked "e1hibit 8"
The witness continued: 1.-THE catch bash
is entirely on my land, and gave permits
sion to other parties to connect with thi
catch basin through my land, and this wa
the way the case was settled. Professo
Ladd had permission to cross my land b.
a sewer pipe some years before this sui
was brought, and it had nothing to d.
with this suit. The other pipe lad beel
laid number of years. and I only granite,
permission to have this taken up and
larger one laid"
| Mr.. Mansfield was the last witness o
the evening, and the court then adjourne,
until next Tuesday evening at 7:3O O'Clock
| RAILROAD NOTES.
Circular Received Yesterday by tn
Stockholders of the Meriden, Wa
terbury and Connecticut Rive