The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-06-10
MAZET'S INVESTIGATION
DISTRICT ATTORNEY GARDINER ON
THE WITNESS STAND.
Closely Examined Concerning His
Conduct of the MoIineux Case--Jus-
tice Court Evils at Chicago.

NEW YORK, June 9.-District Attorney
Gardiner was not present to-day when the
Assembly committee of investigation of
municipal departments resumed its session,
and so. instead of examining Colonel Gardi-
ner. Counselor Moss read from correspon-
dence with the district attorney statement
regarding Indictments and their disposition.
This showed that of 1881 complaints pre-
scented to the grand jury. 2,4T were dis
missed by that body and that of the in
dictments returned, 1901 were dismissed with
the consent or on the motion of the district
attorney. Secretary Lee Phillips of the
municipal civil-service commission. was
called as witness. He had formerly con-
Quoted a school for the preparation of candi-
dates for Office under the city civil-service
rules. He testified that while conducting
this school he received no advance informa-
ton as to the questions to be asked of can
didates.
District Attorney Gardiner appeared at
the afternoon session In response to ques-
tons by Mr.. Moss. he said there was no pub
lie record of cases dismissed in his office.
There was. however, a record with the clerk
Of each Of the courts in which indictments
were dismissed. As to the matter of the
duties of the district attorney with relation
10 the sTdHu jury, 0dTdiIieI Sdlu Hc I" dS
the sole counsel of. the grand jury in cases
excused. and he admitted that he had been
excused from appearing as the grand jurys
counsel in the Molineux case.
why did you be asked to be excused per-
sonally?' he was asked.
Before the coroner's inquest had stated
my own opinion very strongly. and the cor
| he'll t1n
why was it not equally your duty as an
officer of the county, representing the people,
to stand for the same thing before the
1T was equally nay duty TO advise them,
You took personal interest in the case?''
Il can't say a personal interest, because
my personal feelings were very-I felt very
"A personal official INTEREST,"
Yes. sir; because the father Of the pris-
oner had been my friend for thirty-five
1T is said you stated publicly that you
would throw up your hands with joy-sub-
staan n1 that-f the grand jury failed to
II have no recollection of anything of that
kind
would not be indicted to anybody
WAS it a friendly feeling to the Molin-
the grand jury, a hope that. While they they
were fully investigating, the. matter would
not come to Il. the putting of Molineux on
mo. sir; it was not. Because firmly be-
lieve him guilty and am exhausting every
effort to hold him."
If you firmly believe him guilty why did
you not then. as the prosecuting officer of
the county, take all of the great resources
at your command and go In before the
Il never do that. sir. have been brought
up in different school,"
How did you relieve yourself Of the duty
of guiding a grand jury as to matters of
law In matter Of such Importance as that
was?".
them to give 1t to them"
What other case was there where you
asked to be excused besides the Molineux?"
have publicly. and openly, and fairly ex-
pressed firm opinion
Why was it that Assistant District At
torney Mcintyre, having begun the exami-
nation of this case, withdrew from it?"
1T was simply that upheld him at first,
as ! would any one else who happened to
be there"
Mr.. Gardiner said that early in the prose-
cution he became convinced that Molineux
was the guilty man and started out to get
evidence against him.
Mr.. Moss asked a number Of questions
concerning the testimony given before the
coroner's inquest. but Mr.. Gardiner said
that all of ii was a matter of record.
Have you given out statement from
your ONCE renecting upon the rights and
powers of this eommittee?"
Officially. no."
LAS a constitutional officer you mean to
respect the Legislature. do you not?"
Officially. yes. Personally. ] think IL Is
sometimes very hard strain on the con-
science"
Then Mr.. Gardiner declined to answer
number OF questions regarding his opinions
of the committee on the ground that they
were not material TO the inquiry and there
fore not entitled TO an answer. On the same
ground he declined TO say whether he had
any one. who had been subpoenaed not to
appear before the committee. He denied,
however, having been in consultation with
stand.