New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-21
THE GARDINER HEARING
TESTIMONY To SHOW LAXITY IN THE
HANDLING OF INDICTMENTS

s-ain yesterday. as upon the opening day OF
tae inVestigation into the charges which have
teen preferred against District Attorney Gardiner
the hearing mainly devoted to putting trial
records IL evidence. Although the process az nra
seuring these indictments was wes -fsor,e a.
nonotonous, they served the prosecutions purpose
- supplying cumulative proof Of the accIsa+lo-s
o. general laxity in the administration Of the
District Attorneys Office. Case after case uss
brought forward wherein II was shown thar there
had been repeated adjournmeuts witho,I. apparent
reason. where transfers had been made from one
court 70 another for causes that were not clear
snd thaf seemingly there had been misearriases OF
Justice IN consequence
When the hearing was resumed vss+ar5e,, 49,
ing Henry Welsh. Deputy Clerk Of the Cou-r Of
General Sessions. recalled % the Stand r5o-~..
E Derning on behalf OF the prosecution showed
the witness batch OF papers relatinl, 10 ar In
dictment against Francis z Eggleston and others
for gambling. The papers showed thar FepIas+o,
was indicted on December 10 1898 that the case
was subsequently transferred from the Court Of
Special Sessions TO Genera! Sessions and that
when Il was ultimately brought for trial last
January The trial resulted In q verdict NJ not
guilty Nj Deming sought TO obtain from the
witness Information how many times the
case was adjourned. but Samuel Untermyer who
appeared for Mr.. Gardiner objected on the ground
that the charges against the District Attorney did
not contain as z specification that he had granted
or bad drained adjournments improperly He
urged that i MI Gardiner was TO be held re-
spCGslaie for the aoJOurnmeEts granted BY the
judges Of the Court Of General Sessions II would
D. necessary for him in each case to show for
ius- what particular reason the DELAYS were
granted Commissioner Wilcox however held that
tnasnlch as the number Of adjoUrnments in each
case was matter OF record marked upon the
fare q the indictments. the witness might testify
10 the facts. II would. however be incumbent
upon The prosecution to show that those adjourn
nents were improperly procured But despite the
ruing IN his favor. NJ. Demng did not press his
question
sIr Deming proceeded 10 examine the witness on
uuueruus other indictments as 20 their transfer
renee from one court 70 another the number of ad-
j0gr1-nents taken and the final disposition Of the
case. One OF these indictments was against a
woman named Kate Stack. 1rho was charged with
keeping Illegal lying-in esta blishnent, and with
cruelty children Although she pleaded guilty
both Instances she was fined only IS in the first
case and discharged III the other. upon the recon-
incubation OF Assistant District Attorney O'Con-
Tor Another case wherein 'ndictm mt
qlashed was that Of Joseph Gray, who was in
dicted for keeping a bucket shop. The case
dropped because the trial Of q similar charge
against Eggleston resulted n acquittaI and
therefore & Ike result in Gray's case was looked
-f-- = d -Ot eeLV collcL5slOAi Nj OeiIIttls vent
o. L show y he records maj many Of the in in
sors dismissed before the cases up for
t-laL The ajority OF them, in fact were either
f0r the prosecution during the trial Mr.. Inter
mEer endeavored 70 neutralize The effect OF this
evidence by giving the name Of the Judge wno
granted CiSmiSSalS. and by asserting that the
District Attorney had only advised the dismissal
c. indictment where there was insufficient evil
6el.e upon which 10 prosecute
As NJ Deming had still many hundreds OF sim
lar Indictments 10 present Commissioner Wilcox
before recess suggested that il would time II
counsel would offer this evidence in the form Of
{ prepared abstract containing the important facts
which l. desired 70 bring out relating to each
Indictment
Subsequently M DeHing referred TO Liquor Tax
is asses al length and promised 70 show thai IN
nsE Consented TO or ar least not opposed their
transfer from the Special the General Sessions,
6esE5re EEs fact the Special Sessions was me
recognized court for these cases, and despite the
fsrr rhst the District Attorney IN his own brief
fsf admitted that such transfers, resulting in de-
frequently resulted in the acquittal Of the de-
IRE hearing viii go on to-day at 1870 a. m