The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-04-16
CROKER SAYS HE'S
AN HONEST Man
Plat Is Responsible For New
Y0rk'S Corruption.
THEN MOSS, TOO,
HAS SHADY RECORD
Tammany's Boss Is Bubbling Over
With Accusations.
Many Questions Put to Him at Mazet
Inquiry He Refuses to Answer,
and Dramatic Scenes Are En-
acted-Tempers Lost On Both
Sides-Would Not Be Badgered
Into Discussing His Personal Af-
fairs, Even When Dared.

New York, April 15.-Richard Croker
was again the chief witness at today's
session of the Mazet investigation COM
mittee, which was confined to the morn
ing, so that all concerned could prepare
to greet the Raleigh in the afternoon.
The Tammany leader produced seVe-
raj sensations, but these resulted more
from his counter charges than from any
unexpected revelations wormed out OF
him by the tireless Moss Mr.. Croker
declared that Senator Platt's firm was
at the bottom of all the corruption in
New York City, and he almost init
mated that he believed Mr.. Moss had
been none too honest while a police
commissioner of this city. He stoutly
maintained his own honesty.
Once or twice during the dramatic eX-
change of accusations and denials be
tween lawyer and leader, tempers We're
lost on both sides. There was no veil
ing to the accusations of dishonesty i'm
piled by the questions which MIR. Moss
hurled at Mr.. Croker, and which almost
invariably We're met with the reply:
Decline to answer.
Stock transactions, Mr.. Croker main
tained, were personal matters" Be
hind this answer he hedged time and
again, and as a result only small
amount of tangible evidence was al
duced as regards alleged corruption, al
though some questions asked and not
denied implied that corruption of the
worst kind existed. Mr.. Moss endeav-
ored to badger Mr.. Croker into telling
of his personal affairs, and finally told
the Tammany leader that he dared
not tell Mr.. Croker'S examination was
not concluded. and he is expected to be
a witness on Monday, when the session
will be resumed.
MR.. CROKER'S PARTNER.
The only other witness whose testi
mony attracted attention was Peter f.
Meyer, Mr.. Croker's business partner
He too, took refuge behind the plea
that personal matters should not hs
examined into, and as a result his evil
dence resulted only in the inadvertaat
admission, afterward qualified, that Mr.
Croker had him (Mr. Meyer appointed
a dock commissioner.
The hearing took place in the United
States criminal court room, scarcely
large enough to accommodate 300 per-
sons. There were present eighty-four
reporters and stenographers, leaving
little room for many outsiders who were
anxious to hear what more Mr.. Croker
had to say, and what more Mr.. Moss
had to ask him.
Ihere was an expectation undI llkC
John G. Carroll, his deputy, Mr.. Croker
would refuse to answer questions on the
ground that they related to personal
matters, and that Mr.. Croker might, as
a result, be reported to the state legis-
lature for alleged contempt.
Peter f. Meyer was called. Mr.. Meyer
replied to questions regarding his auc-
ton business, but impaired no infor-
nation regarding judicial sales addi
tional to what was brought out yester-
day. He did not. he said, take Mr..
Croker into partnership to get the ben
eft of the latter's reputation and infiu
ence, but to get satisfaction out of a
certain party that I had little grudge
against
Witness would not explain this state
ment. He was not officially connected
with the organization known as Tam
many hail. but was treasurer of the
Tanlmany society. an old secret so
ciety of a. social character. Mr.. Meyer
admitted that Mr.. Croker had him ap-
pointed to the dock board, but he cor
rected himself by saying he was ap-
pointed by Mayor Van Wyck. He had
bought stock of the Consolidated Ice
! company while a number of the dock
| board. but refused to go into details
regarding that transaction, saying that
| it was his private business. There We're