Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-09-11

After short but interesting ant lively hearing of the complaint bJ Emnet F. Riordon charging Chief o1 Police Egan with neglect of duty Il allowing performances at Aoi's anC Jacques without license since the opening of the theatrical season, the board of public safety last evening dismissed the complaint and fully ano thoroughly exonerated the chief. Al times during the hearing it was ap- parent to the small crowd of specta tors that MT Riordon knew he was uI against it, to use the vernacular o1 the street But that he put his shoulder to the wheel and tried to dc the best he could was also equally ap- parent And though he was wOrste0 it cannot be denied that MT RiordoI has not stepped upon a topic that might create a lot of interest before he is through with it.
 All the members of the board except MT Taylor were present, and Commis- Eioner. Lahey presided. The fornality of reading the charges to the chief. as
 
 this one. The chief was merely asked if he were guilty or not guilty of the charges, it being understood that he knew what they were, and he noncha- lantly replied, 'sN9ot guilty"
 Tax Collector Thoms was then called by MT Riordon as his first wit ness, and in reply to questions put by Mr Riordon he said that he has not countersigned any license for any per fornaance either at PoH's or Jacques during the past year, nor has he re- ceiyed any money from that source He was certain he did not receive any money or countersign any license since August 3, and while he would have to look up the records for the rest of the year he was still reasonably sure that he had not received any license mon ey Or comtersigned any permit for either of the amusement houses men. toned.
 Chief Bgan was asked if he wished Do question the witness and he smilingly said he did not At the request of City Clerk Ryan MT Thoms was asked if he had countersigned and licensed since he
 
 rthat to the best of his belief that he did not He said that he understood it was his duty to eountersign licenses of the nature in question when they would be brought'to him to receive the money for them. He could not recall any license for which he received any money.
 Clerk Ryan said that it would be Impossible for MT Thoms to counter sign any license because he had not is sued any.
 In reply to a question from the chair MT Riordon stated that he had heard there were no licenses issued to the houses for certain performances and he asked the chief of police about it. He understood that these licenses should bring to the city about $2,500 or 5000 a year. He looked it up and found it was so. He told the chief and the chief did not believe him. An annual license is not legal and the city has not been getting from this source of income what 1t should have got. He complained to the chief about this. He told him that the ordinance stated that the city should be paid $5 for ev- cry performance given in the theaters for every show, in fact of every kind, and that there was one of the severest penalties in the ordinance attached for giving a performance without a li- cense. The ordinances are manda- tory on this point. They say the col lector shall countersign every license and collect the money therefor. There has been no license granted, however, but the performances have been given.
 The chief told him, MT Riordon went on, that he had the city clerks word for it that there had been license is- sued, but the chief should not take anyone's word for it, whether city of ficial or not It was his duty to see that the law was carried out, that li- censes had been issued properly and legally before any performance wa given in the theaters mentioned
 The Chair-*But if the city clerk in forms the chief that license nas been granted, do you claim the chief is still negligent in his duty ?"
 MT Riordon-"That is for the city clerk to answer. It is the chiefs duty to enforce the ordinance. He is not supposed nor expected to take any one's word for it. No excuse for him whatever. He spoke to the chief twice about this matter and I assured him that had looked it up and that no license had been issued Under these circumstances I should say he was negligent in the performance of his duty. The ordinance provides for the payment of $5 for each perform ance; there is no ordinance providing for an 3anYaT1<aI Iionp 60
 MT Riordon claimed that a certain passage providing that licenses shal not be granted for over one year con cerned trade licenses only, such as plumbers licenses, etc.