Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-09-11
CHIEF EGAN ExONERATED BY BOARD.
Charges of P RiOrden Were Not PrOve-e Threatens to Bring
 Matter to Attention of Aldermen

IIVaS Ol hiUSElNSM.
 I He insisted that by the evidence of MT Thoms he had shown that the chief of police was negligent in the performance of his duty. The chief was asked if he wished to question MT R1ordon and he replied in an easy, in different way that he did not; that so far he saw no evidence given; simply arguments were made.
 l The chair said that so far the board was at sea in the matter. There were no records shown, no evidence given and it was up to MT Riordon" MT Riordon insisted he had the evidence of the tax collector and said that he was satisfied to have the records to produce. He suggested that Clerk Ryan be produced. This was done and MT Ryan testified that licenses had been issued for both theaters up to January, 1904. He declined to tell what the number of them were on the grounds that he did not think that point had anything to do with the in yesHgation. He also refused to tell what had been paid for them on the same grounds. MT Riordon thought the Law was sufficient on that point, however. He asked MT Ryan if any fee had been paid over to the tax col lector and this he also refused to tell. MT RioFdan said it was up to the board to make the city clerk tell, and the chair said it was getting to be personal matter between the city clerk and Mir Rierdan and that the matter of the fee had nothing to do with the in quiry.
 MT Riordon said he did not care to ask the clerk if he had told the chief that license had been granted, but he did think the amount received for the license, if any had been received, should be told. He knew the chief had nothing to do with issuing the li- cense, but he again insisted that it was the chiefs duty to know whether or not license had been granted.
 Commissioner Beach remarked that if Clerk Ryan was before the board on charges he could be made to answer the question, but under the circulN- stances he need not answer, and the chair thought the question inadmissa- bIe, anyway, and it was accordingly ruled out.
 Once again the chief was asked if he cared to question the witness and he replied that he did not think it neces- sary to say anything then. He would like the board, however, to ask MT Ryan if he had told him (the chief) if both houses had been licensed up to January, 1904. To Commissioner Hardie he said that it was not custom ary for him to inquire if licenses have been granted for shows or for any oth- CT kind of exhibitions. Usually the clerk informs him as in cases of cir cuses, travelling shows and boxing ex- hibitions. This has been the regular course and he always considered 1t authority sufficient. Then he burst out quite passionately, with upraised hand: 'sThere has been no evidence of any of the shows mentioned in the complaint having ever appeared at those theaters. No evidence of any performance whatever being given there. It is not shown that the com plaint is legal or if it is worth the pa per it is written on. There has been no evidence or opinion as to validity of the ordinance mentioned here and I would advise the board not to fn- uuire too far in that direction" Then, turning toward MT Riordon, he said quite warmly, that most assuredly he would take the word of any city off, cial, "and ask the board to dismiss these charges he said, burning with indi dignation and quivering with ex- citement. 1T ask the board to fully ex- onerste me without my bringing any witnesses"
 Mir Riordon then made his argument He went over the grounds already covered by him. He claimed to have proven lis case by the evidence of MT Thoms. He claimed that the ordi- nances should be followed. If MT Thoms's statement was not evidence he would like to know what evidence is. While he did not know that the performances mentioned in the com p1aint were given, it was public fact that they were given. The board knew that. He would not argue that point, however, but he would claim that they took place without being lj censed. The main point was that the city was out so much money, $2,50O or g., GOO, largely through the negligence of tho chief of police.
 Commissioner Lahey said the main point was the charge against the chief. MT Riordon went on to say that he had shown that the ordinance was not carried out, that $5 was not paid for each performance in the~opera house | es. "& Commissioner Lahey said there was no evidence on these points at all and upon motin made by Commissioner Beach the complaint was dismissed and the chief fully exOnerated
 Upon leaving the room MT Riordon said it was matter for the board of | aldermen.