The sun., 1899-04-27
THE CONSPIRACY TRIAL.
HOW THE V4LLEY STREAM PROP
ERTY WAS BOUGHT.

A System of References Described by the
Witnesses. Through which Cammans
Sold the Property 10 Denton for %, 1875
and He Sold II to brooklyn for - 900 80.
The trial OF former City Works Comm Missioner
Theodore d. Willis and former Police Commits
sioner William l.. Phillps was continued yes
'erday In Part V. Of the Supreme Court in
Brookyn and at the afternoon session Jus
ti"es Almet T. jerks and Josiah T. Marean
were visitors and sat beside Justice Wilmot
VI. Smith. District Attorney Steele called as
his first witness Engineer. /. n. De Varcna.
who is in charge OF the water supply system,
who told OF having in 1897, recommended the
acquisition Of more land at Valley Stream for
the Improvement Of the water system. which
was then polluted
Clrich Maurer. a builder. testified that he
was the agent for Valley Stream property
owned by Jacob Cammans and that he saw
Commissioner Willis in relation to tho land.
and thai bmmissioner Willis referred him to
Daniel Doody. lie subsequently saw Doody
and they went to Valley Stream to look at tho
property
On cross-eXamination Mr. Maurer said he had
had business dealings with Doody for ten years
and that In 1890 he opened an account in the
store Of T. Is. Willis & Brother and ran up a
bill OF S3lO44
Isn't 1t q fact that the bill was not paid until
November 1892" asked Col. Lamb Yes
sir said the witness.
And during that time didn Z q cole ctor call
on you about twenty times?' He did"
And didn't Mr.. Willis threaten to sue you?"
Yes. sir"
And you have never traded there since?"
NO. sir" said Mr. Maurer.
Jacob Camnans. who sold the property at
Valley Stream testified that Maurer introduced
Doody to him and that Doody took him to see
Mr.. Philips. who promised to get n purchaser.
Mr.. Philips subsequently introduced Robert c.
Denton. who made an offer OF $40 all acre
which was accepted.
ON cross examination Mr. Cammans said he
nut the price at $40 an acre because he wanted
to get rii OF IT, He knew that land was selling
IN the place for 500 all acre. He believed he
received sil3l Tor the property;
Robert {. Denton testified that he subse-
Ivn for $4.a}.i.oO He said the money which
arnsSed bs I rGs and sap tas Wnes
received as his share OF the transaction only
District Attorney Steele then called Charles
II. Meyer who was Superintendent OF sewer
constrlsti?n in 1857. Mr.. Meyer said he had
would cost about Sl2.ou0,
= Charles + Cozzens Of freeport l.. l.. testi-
sewer was made out in hia name. and that he
had perm tied Doody to use his name iu order
that Doody could get the contract. He said
he had never received anv remuneration for
the use Of his name
Daniel Doodv was then recalled by District
he said that on the contract for filling 10 En-
mons avenue he had paid Mr. Philips :only on
hurst avenue sewer cont ractl W6ib % Was in The
name OF Frazier. He had also paid Mr.. Phil
ips nercentage on the contract for the re-
-. Didn't YOU pay him ANYTHING on the New
Utrecht avenue contract asked District At
No. sir; did no., replied the witness
Why not:" asked District Attorney, steele.
low. and District ATTORNEY steele said aid he he
thought the witness should answer It. as it
might LEAD i to c,9 something else The witness
avenue contract he had a conversation with
Commissioner Willis; and that he made two
Willis claimed had been due his firm for four
years. The bill. the witness said. he disputed
Co. .Auer'that, the witness said Mr Wills re.
marked that II Mr. Lewis recommended the
repaying OF New Utrecht avenue the Job would
The District Attorney introduced several
letters recommending that the work should
neer Lewis. Water Purveyor Oscar Knapp and
Deputy r2mmisssioner iss,c Robert ". FieldiRs.
that Mr. G Wins knew Ss aoihnn abo%, @ these re
pairs. and that he never saw the letters
Of mb MSeh h paoS bs, In a
he notes -, bqt yo% tss,tnsa ;,s,,! SsfoTe SSs
Lamb III did then it was the truth" said
M Doody We're not 'hese notes given for
claim Mr.. Willis had against you for hardware
furnished for new buildings on Rogers ave.
nue." asked Col. Lamb, Il don't know" said
the witness.
But you testified before the Grand Jury that
the notes were given for a claim for hardware
purchased by a man named Webster. who
vas IN @ souf e'r0E sU sa2 Doaav lao faiu ;r,s nut
ting up some buildings on Rogers avenue. and
Webster got some hard;rare in my name and
refused to pay for IT, and said should pay the
bill. refused to do so. as Webster bought
the goods. That was seven years ago"
And the amount OF the claim was $500. was
il not?" asked Col. Lamb.
Il think So" said Doody.
The court then adjourned until this morning.