The Saint Paul globe., 1899-04-23

;" in Legislative InuulRltOr&.
NEW YORK, April 22.-Beyond the
enunciation OF stringent line of action
against contumaci cious witnesses and the
preparation to make a speedy example
Of one individual, todays sessions of the
Mazet investigation committee were
comparatively uninteresting and unim-
portant. Neither Mr.. Croker nor any of
the better known persons associated with
him were examined, and the affairs of
the Tammany leader did not come into
prominence. After one more session, on
Monday, it is announced the committee
will adjourn until May g. and in the
interval, it is presumed, they will submit
preliminary report to the legislature
and, possibly, proceed against several
witnesses for contempt
Today's proceedings opened with an
investigation of the proceedings in this
city of the Maryland Whisky company.
Mr.. Moss had several times intimated
that this brand was being sold through
the influence of city officials Samuel
Meters. a Broadway tailor who Mr..
Moss seemed TO think had furthered the
sale o. the Maryland whisky, refused
tions and Chairman Mazet directed that
counsel should bring Meters before the
court for contempt, as soon as possi-
BILE.
The other witnesses called confined
their testimony almost entirely to the
building department and the various sys-
TENS of fiTeprooGng.
Charles c. Haight, an architect. testi-
fed regarding a letter sent to him by
William j. Freyer, member of the board
of building examiners and chairman of
the New York state building law commits
sion. Mr.. Haight said that Mr. Fryer
had sent Mr.. Young to him with a let
ter OF introduction, with an idea that
Mr. Young might do some work for the
witness. Mr.. Haight testified that he
had forgotten who Mr.. Fryer was and
did not treat Mr.. Young with cordiality
Mr.. Fryer then wrote to Mr. Haisht a
letter which was produced in evidence
in this communication Mr.. Fryer chided
Mr.. Haight for his treatment of Mr.
Young and stated in part:
II write now to say that perhaps 1t
may turn out at some future day that
you will know who 1 am AS it has
turned out, it will be just as well, and
If it should ever happen again that YOU
need my help it will be necessary for you
to bring a letter of introduction yourself
to me-
MIR. Haight said he assumed a threat
was intended by this letter
MR.. FRYER CALLED.
William J. Fryer, to whom Mr. Haights
testimony applied, took the witness
chair. Mr.. Fryer said he had been a
member OF the board of building exam
iners for more than ten years. The ex-
aminers had held public hearings regard
ing freproof systems. He knew that
Mr.. Mccain had appeared before the
board on behalf of some interest (Mr
McCann is q nephew of Mr.. Croker. He
had not seen nor heard anything to show
what Mr.. Mccain was doing for the in
terest he represented. Mr. Fryer admit
ted that his membership in the board
might incidentally help his business as
an architect, but his official duties had
not been neglected for his private bus
iness.
Mr.. Fryer was questioned closely re-
garding the rebuilding of the Third Ave-
nue. theater. in which undertaking he
was the architect. He testified that he
had received 800 from Peter Brennan for
advice in regard to a building at the
corner of Cortland and Church streets.
The plan had been rejected by the su-
Fryer was called in, and the board Of
perintendent of buildings before Mr.
Fryer was called in, and the board of
examiners, Of which Mr.. Fryer was a
member, had also rejected the plan. After
Mr.. Fryer had given his advice the board
approved the plan. Mr.. Fryer did not
vote when the plans came up for the