The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-11-19

Non-atten1ing witnesses again made
the conclusion of the Kinsley investiga-
tion an indefinite quantity 1t was
hoped to finish up the Sunday World
side of the case last night, but the fail
ure of two or three witnesses to answer
the subpoena precluded the possibility
of this.
AS has happened every night so far,
there was a wrangle over the scope of
the inquiry. Last night 1t arose over
the introduction of the testimony of
Thomas Hennigan. Mr.. Newcomb
started out by asking the witness if he
had ever heard Emmet Peet say any
thing about the ownership of the team
he drove. Mr.. Burns objected on the
grounds that Peet himself had been on
the stand and was as Car as was known
a competent witness. Peets declara-
tionS should not come secOnd-handed.
Mr.. Newcomb stated it was his inten-
tion to show by the witness that Peet
had not told the whole truth. Mr. Wat
son raised a second objection that this
would be an infringement of one of the
best established rules of evidence, that
is. party cannot descredit the testi-
mony of his own witness. Mr.. New
comb held that there were no parties
in this Investigations; that it is not u
trial. and that he was not there as u
u
prosecutors, but simply as represent
ative of the World people, who through
the graciousness of the mayor, had
been permitted to have counsel present
in order to show that their charges had
foundation in fact. There Is no such
thing as ones own witness" in these
proceedings, Mr.. NewcOmb continued.
After consultation with the men,
bers of the committee the mayor direct
ed Hennigan to answer the question.
WHAT HENNIGAN HEARD.
Hennigan had two conversations with
Peet during September. Peets horse
ran away one night on West Lacka-
wana avenue, and ran down the old
Love road. When TIE morse was caught
and brought back Peet said: THE old
man will give me Sam Hill for breaking
this bride" Another night Peet re-
fused to pull the whole length of the
street washing hose up a hill because
he said Mr.. Kinsley wouldn't want him
to use his (Mr. Kinsley's) horses that
way. BY "the old man" was meant
Mr.. Kinsley, who was thus dubbed by
the street commissioners gang, the
witness said.
John II. Jones, Of 323 Evans court
worked on the street gang during the
fall and winter Of 1895 and the spring
of 1896. He knew Emmet Peet and
saw him driving Mr.. Kinsley's family
carriage quite as often as he saw him
driving a working team on the streets.
He also knew Jake Betcher and knew
that he drove a team on the street
gang. Witness could not say who
owned the team Betcher drove. He had
heard Betcher say that he went to
Kinsley's barn to get the team every
day. Witness was set to work clearing
up around the Frothingham theater
by Foreman George Perigo. He heard
Perigo say one time last winter in the
hallway of the municipal building base
ment that there were free tickets con-
cerned.
on cross-examination he said he saw
Peet driving Mr.. Kinsley's carriage one
day in front Of the Globe store and at
another time in front of Goldsmith's
Bazaar. Witness left the street depart
ment on the Sth Of August, 1896.
"COAR DIDN'T DIvvY."
Thomas Coar, of 22O Emmet street,
was also on the stand. He worked for
the city in the capacity of teamster at
different times during the past two
years. He kept no account of the peri
DDS he worked on the city streets. he
knew George Perigo. the foreman OF
the street commissioners department,
but denied that he ever paid Perigo
money for employed. He denied that
he ever told DR.. Reedy or Frank Mawn
that he got work from Perigo and
"divvied" up with Perigo. He admit
ted having worked on the grounds of
the Country club last October, but
could not give the number of days. He
had talk with George Perigo yester-
day morning. To Mr.. Newcomb's ques-
tion, Does your poor memory date
from this talk with Mr.. Perigo?" he
answered 1T certainly does" Mr..
Burns, however, in cross examination.
elected the fact that the witness did
not understand Mr.. Newcomb's ques-
ton.
Mr. Newcomb said he had ransacked
the directories and assessment books,
but could find no such person as Eu-
gene Rinehart, whom Harry Kinsley
mentioned as one of his drivers. Street
Commissioner Kinsley, in reply to Mr..
Newcomb's inquiry, answered that
Rinehart was still about the city and
had been seen this week To the best
of Mr.. Kinsley's opinion, Rinehart is
working in some livery stable here
abouts.
BETCHER WAS RECALLED.
Jacob Betcher was recalled, and in
answer to Mr.. Newcomb's question as
to whether or not he was positive he
never drove a team for the city prior
to Sept. 5. 1895, said he might have
helped a driver or taken the place of
one who would be taken sick. He could
not tell positively whether or not he
drove team prior to Sept. 5. 1895. He
might have driven one of Kinsley's s
teams in October, 1895, for a day or
two. but not more than that. He could
not remember whether or not he drove
team in November, December or any
succeeding month. His memory, he
said. was bad. He had not talked with
Perigo or Kinsley or anybody else
about the investigation since 1t began.
Mr.. Newcomb a. this juncture an
nounced that owing to the non-attend-
ance of James Ryan and one or two
other witnesses, he could proceed no
further. He asked for an attachment
for Ryan. saying that it had come to his
ears that Ryan had stated that he
would be d if he would go there
and testify against Kinsley."