New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-07

HIS EXPLANATION OF THE INQUEST IN
THE CASE OF MRS. G. p. HARMON.

TIE REASON HE ALLOWED THE EMPLOYER OF
THE MAN ACCUSED or HOMICIDE TO ACT AS
INTERPRETER. HE SAYS. WAS THAT
HE WAS AS GOOD AS ANY
poDY HE COULD GET.
Coroner Emil w Hoeber called at The Tribune
ofce Yesterday in rotation TO interview with
Isaac r. Potter chief consul Of the New-fork state
Division of the League of American Wheeln1en, pup
llshod yesterday. Mr. Potter on Wednesday at
tended the inquest IN the Of Mrs. G. r. Harmon.
the bicycllst who killed in a collision with
brewery wagon at Fifth-ave. and Ninety-sixth-st.
on November 49, Mr.. Potter was present to iook
after the interests OF wheelmen. on Thursday ne
learned that Coroner Hoeber's interpreter in the
case John c. Bactjer, Of Jersey City, president
of the brewing company which employed the driver
who was charged with homicide for causing MIS-
Harmon's death Mr. Potter also criticised the
Coroner for persisently bringing out hearsay testi-
mony. Coroner Hoeber said:
MADE CORRECTIONS HIMSELF.
I'm the first place. Mr.. Potter had no standing in
my court. He represented tho League Of American
Wheelmen. but It had not been injured and was not
concerned But wanted to give both sides fair
chance / didn't know at first that the man VINO
acted as Interpreter the employer OF the poor
fellow who was charged with homicide But
wasn't satisfied with his TRANSACTIONS of the answers
and | myself a dozen times corrected him. There is
official interpreter and the Coroner is compelled
the services of any one who happens to be at
hand. Now. everybody In the room was concerned
on one side the other and would be prejudlced
So | couldn't get any interpreter in the courtroom
who was not interested side or the other.
M. Potter says | asked for hearsay testimony
So did he / lawyer. II the peop.e wanted
the Coroner's court to be conducted on legal prn-
cples. they would EJECT judges as coroners. am
physician. coroner is liquor-seer and another
"a a was for m O
hearsay testimony wasn't it much worse for a
lawyer to do it?
THE article in The Tribune says the driver adj
mitted he had been drinking. That is not so. in
quired particularly about that He had a glass Of
whskey at 43O in the morning and four glasses OF
beer before noon The accident happened in the
afternoon. You know that wasn't enough to make
the driver of beer wagon drunk Besides i par
partly under the influence of liquor, ne wasn't 80
much to blame If he had been sober. Wasn't
that right? Don't you think so? Nobody mods a
! man so much accountable for what he does when he
has been drinking as when he IS sober lie doesn
know 50 wei, what he is doing. | tod the jury that
THE poor fellow was charged with homicide e or
manslaughter. and asked him al the tacts f dW4
that the accident occurred asked MN te
siaged by callers yesterday most OF them riders
the course he had pursued in the Harmon inquest
held by Coroner Hoebe: on Wednesday Replying
a statement
he had no official interpreter. Mr. Potter said:
1T Is unfortunate that his efforts in this case
were rewarded with such an improper selection
There are thousands of Germans who are ready 10
act on all occa sons If asked and who would trans
erruptons by the Coroner The trouble was tnat
not one in a thousand knew that the case was to
come IN and the proceedings be characterized
as irregular in many particulars
HOEBERS INTERRUPTIONS.
Coroner Hoeber interrupted the interpreter. II
Is true He and the Interpreter could not agree put
with nv imperfect knowledge Of the language, l
could not tell which right. 1t Is also true, as
the Coroner is reported to have said. that nobody
had any standing in the premises except coroner
Uoeber There is question OF dispute on tndt
polnt So far as the conduct and the result or the
inquest are concerned, they are probably the same
as though the Coroner had been there alone IL /
had had any standing there by right, instead OF
| nv courtesv the record would have showed an en-
| tireIy dinferent state of affairs
NO lawyer had any right 10 object or eHcept
10 any proceedings in that court But as cltiZen
| | have a right condemn every improper or unjust
proceeding that Is carried under the name OF an
| inquest. :, A., 49,. sx for
I hearsav testimony. That is true. He Simply pro-
ducei It. Every far-minded Coroner acts IN d
judicial capacity at an inquest and any coroner
! wno deiberat cy receives testimony when common
| law and common sense condemn as unht tor q
| judicial conclusion is guilty OF an act which
| would better characterize just now.