New-York tribune., 1899-06-07

Thomas J. Blessing with these witnesses: d. J:
FOOe VSn eot t. HG"sr e snmmerviie Ed%afd BECK N
Greenng. James X Price. ! ask the committee 10
OF these cases. Every effort has been made TO get
from the Clerk of the Court Of General Sessions
assn. .ct Charles MONT referring 10 the
premises No. 26s West Thrty-ninth-st
moved from '5nsis BY Mr. r." Weeks ks "'''e o.o
West Thirty -ninth-st Were those three Of the
houses you had complained about? Al had COM
pained of the two first that were mentioned there,
The Charman-what did those indictments
Mr. Moss-Permitting the building be used for
an unlawful purpose to wit for the purpose o. ana m
various language. All the same charges In reter-
ence 10 the different houses 49,
Just before those indictments were made Il was
common thing for women TO solicit from the WIN.
from the windows OF those houses. ,,,.,
Mr. Moss-I find no Endorsement on these indc,- a,
IDENTIFY the indictments found March, 1894. went
without trial as to that M S s The 5%o and
refer to Nos 2G6 and 26s West Thirtieth-st; hGbn @
indictment against David Korn is for the purpose
the same reason. rather. and specifies PARTICULARLY
Jennie freeman and one Mary Keith for improper
purposes as specified. These indictments against
torney OF his own motion with this Endorsement
The nuisance charged has been abated in this tnls
and the lesson OF the duty OF property owners has
been sufficient, that the other premises are nor
used for immoral purposes ! recoTmeGndS, the as
mssa Of the ind.tment stePhen Hare son AS IS
given for each Of those three Korn indictments.
FELLOWS IN OFFICE THEN.
Mr. Honman-who was the Dstrict-Attorney at
Mr. Moss-Evidently Stephen ]. o'Hare.
Mr. Hoffman-No the District-Attorney.
Mr. Moss-December 81 1853 That would be MI
Fellows In the case Of Mr. Blessing the Indictment
was dismissed for reasons which are stated as t9I-
lows; July 13; 1897 Endorsement signed by ID
that there is sufficient evidence against the de-
fendant TO warrant his being placed on trial He Is
sures me that the testimony that would be pro-
duced by the prosecution is entirely insufficient to
defendant go on his own recognizance." Apparently
no action was taken upon that recommendation
IS peeembsr Ss i I The defendant has Repeatedly
demanded some final disposition of this indictment
tlon to the recItals in Mr. Lloyds former ndorse-
nent. from my personal knowledge Of the circum-
stances surrounding the findings OF this indct-
ment and controversy between the defendant Os-
good and the rival real estate oWner am o1 UI
over defendant. and the people do not intend to
further snd cannot possibly seGuTe con- NJ
this Indictment. H. W. Unger, Deputy" And so
Q-Wers you consulted about the dismissal OF
that indictment? A.-No, sir.
Odd Captain Price take an interest In Mr.;
bae sesf1s dd and 'ho" " In his conversation with Y0u
Ole was a strong defender Of Mr. Blessing all
through your efforts to secure the indictment Of
these people. was he not2 Ayes. sir
Odd he abuse you in the interest OF Mr.:
Blessing and in that OF any OF these other people?
Avery frequently.
Q.-Insulted you on the street? A common
occurrence. I would like 10 give you some facts
about that Blessing matter; -.
Q.-I suggest that you do not. You have been
sued by Mr.. Blessing on the dismissal or this In
dctment for false Imprisonment or malicious prose-
cution, and therefore / suggest, you say nothing
witness against Blessing as have read? A.-No.