The record-union., 1896-05-02
RUTHERFORD KNOCKED out.
One Star in the Police Fifmament is Not
Shining.
Six Trustees Voted to Remove Him
Two Did Not Vote, and One
Was Absent.

There is now long-looked for va
cancy on the police force and the woods
are full of candidates for it. The prize
star is the one lately worn by w. P
Rutherford and the latter Is a private
citizen.
The Board OF Trustees met last even
ing to investigate the charges preferred
against Rutherford by Chief of Police
Drew, alleging that the former was
guilty Of violating the rules of the Police
Department by unnecessary absenting
himself from his beat while in the per-
formance of his duty.
There was no loss of time in settling
down to business, and as soon as Presi-
dent Leonard had called the meeting to
order and stated its nature Corporation
Counsel Hiram w. Johnson, who con-
Quoted the prosecution. called Chief Of
Police Drew to the stand.
The witness testified to having pre-
ferred the charges against Rutherford.
He had on April 14th found Rutherford
in attendance at the Police Court, when
he should have been on duty on beat
three. The witness had asked Ruther-
ford if he had case before the court
and the latter replied that he had not,
but wished to see City Attorney Brown
about some subpenas. The witness
told him to see Brown and then go back
TO his beat.
Later in the day Rutherford visited the
witness private office and asked why
he had been "called down" in the morn
inc 10 toll haf ha !,
called down. but retorted that he had
He insisted that other officers were not
criticised when they attended the ses-
sons of the court and the witness de-
clared that they were all served alike
and no favoritism was shown. Warm
talk followed and Rutherford was or
dered out of the office by the Chief and
told not to return unless on official busi-
ness. Still later in the day Rutherford
Jumped the witness for the third time
and said that Officers Maley and Hig-
gins were often off Of their beats and
We're never called down. for their ac-
tions. This the witness denied, and the
denial was disputed by Rutherford. The
latter, in fact, according to the testi
nlony, Disputed the witness on nearly
every point.
Officer Bagley early in the day asked
the witness what was wrong between
him and Rutherford and stated that the
latter had said he would call the witness
down before night. In this, continued
the witness, he kept his word and gave
his ''call down" on schedule time.
Lawyer c. T. Jones took the witness
in hand for cross examination, but
ioi+ +A1 = 20. n =
ceed in worrying Chief Drew in the
least.
Police Sergeant ]. j. Plunkett re-
peated one Of the conversations he had
heard between Chief Drew and Officer
Rutherford. He heard Rutherford dis
pute his superior's word. In the main
his evidence was corroborative of that
Of Chief Drew.
On cross-examination, the witness
said he had heard Rutherford say to
the Chief: You are no friend of minei
You allow other men to stay around
headquarters while on duty, and say
nothing about it," This was denied by
Drew and reiterated by Rutherford.
Night Patrol Driver John Fitzgerald
proved a very good witness, and went
into details, showing that nothing
which he had heard escaped him. He
had not, however, seen very much, and
did nothing more than to corroborate
the evidence of Sergeant Plunkett.
Rutherford, the witness said, did not
appear to be very angry, and Chief
Drew cool throughout
! officer John P. Bagley knew consid-
erable about the matter. Rutherford
| had told him on the morning of April
| 14th that he had had row with Chief
| Drew and intended to have a talk to
the latter about it. This the witness
| had advised him not to do before he
afterward repeated the conversation to
| the Chief His statement corroborated
the evidence given by Chief Drew.
| City Attorney Brown stated that on
the 14th Of April he issued no subpenas
| for any case whatever. This evidence
was intended to offset the statement
| alleged to have been made to the Chief
of Police by Rutherford, to the effect
that he visited the court for the purpose
| of securing subpenas.
| The witness had no conversation of
any kind with Rutherford on the day in
question, and had not even seen the lat
| ter in court.
Up to this time no member Of the
| Board Of Trustees had spoken a word
except to growl at the noise made by
the Capital City Drum Corps, which
persisted in parading in front of the
building, and the evidence of the City
Attorney closed the case against Ruth
| erford.
officer w. P. Rutherford, in his own
defense, testified that shortly before the
h 10 h. l,
Neubar, and visited the court that
morning to see the City Attorney re-
garding subpenas to be issued in the
case. He corroborated the story told
by Chief Drew up to the time Of the
last interview. He denied that he told
Bagley that he intended to "call the
Chief down." but that the former saw
the Chief before the witness was able to
do so. and told his story first
That evening the witness entered the
Chiefs office and asked to have a talk
with the latter, but the Chief at once
ordered him out. Up to that time the
witness had not been at all angry, but
admitted that he got somewhat warm
afterward.
From that point the story told by
Rutherford did not vary from that told
by the preceding witness.
The next morning he had another talk
with Chief Drew, who by this time had
preferred charges against him, and ex-
planned matters satisfactory to all con-
cerned. The Chief told him that if he
had explained matters the day before
| the charges would not have been pre-
| ferred.
| At this point Trustee Devine broke
the silence maintained by the Trustees,
| aud aSlzed from u. hnIao Ii