The news-democrat. (Providence, R.I.) 1906-1909, 1906-05-29

be discourtesy to the board II permit
ted the paper 10 have the affidayits. ana
that he had no objection to offer, leaving
me free TO act.
That made no overtures 10 any paper
but was so surprised at the request py re-
porters for the documents thar i went
personally TO inquire OF the editor how ne
knew enough TO ask for them; and on MS
assurance that he had received informa'
ton through the reporters, and that the
fact that had such affidavits was known
/ consented TO ask Chairman Luther al
ter I had filed the papers for permission
TO allow his paper to publish them
"ln further reputation of the charge or
malicious prosecution would remind you
that ! purposely refrained from serving
legal summons upon any OF my desired
witnesses and have sought only WILING
testimony
/ have thus lost the evidence from sew
eral who did not appear, having learned
from some source that my summons was
not compulsory. because II was not SER
we'd by qualified officer, but sent by
mail Nor have introduced or sought
a long list OF witnesses TO break down
the character OF the defendant by show
Ing the public estimation In which he is
held; nor pressed line of evidence 10
show his conduct toward his superiors
as well knew could have been done.
II have by no means exhausted the re-
sources of attack upon this defendant as
| should have done II malice had prompt
ed me I'm my complaint.
"In the conduct OF the defence you have
had an object lesson In the methods that
J, too. might have adopted I'm making a
vigorous, determined and exhaustive at.
tack upon the life and character of my
adversary.
ct call vo,, ~ u,it ese t1,at have been
fair and honorable In nay line Of attack.
and that. have shown reasonable re-
straint and no malice In my conduct dur
ing this hearing.
when you view the difficulties under
which I have labored in attempting 20
prove my case you will perceive that II
/ had been actuated by malice | must
have inevitably grown more bitter and
malicious in my struggle with adverse
conditions
'~The defendant possessed and exercised
to the full all the extraordinary powers OF
the police department and has summoned
the willing assistance of the police OF
every city that could aid him. while l
was only private citizen, dependent on
the limited resources of a small income
and asking simply for volunteer wit
nesses.
Those who came 10 testify for me had
TO meet and Withstand the subtle intim.
ldatOn WIlcn came lTonl tnt SlsHl VI uii-
formed policemen who crowded the build
ing, and gave instant obedience 30 the
man who, though the accused, was
clothed In the full insignia OF chief OF
police and able to remember those who
might testify against him.
Against my principal witnesses was
exercised a series of petty prosecutions
which began promptly on the morning
after their affidavits were filed by an act
of arbitrary tyranny directly traced TO the
defendant and continued by other acts
that were traced to such close friends OF
his as 10 leave no doubt In my mind on
theirs that the same hand OF power was
in them And when appealed on behalf
of these two witnesses TO two OF the men,
bers OF this board for relief from such
threats and shadowing as we. described.
wac unable to secure any such relief.
With such agents as Shea and Stebbins
at work outside the limits OF this state
you were helpless to deal
"And when Naeh did not appear TO testi-
~, and the defendant who had been 80
worried. irritable and aggressive on May
End was so calm and cheerful and care.
free on May Sd. and the detectives who
were sent to look for Nash. were so slow
and indifferent that they did not saunter
into 1893 Westminster street till long after
had arrived there. though l was de,
tained here some time after the order
Marshal Stebbins display those warrants,
and. eeizing the full significance OF all
these points. charged the defendant with
having driven away Nash by threats, did
then exhibit the malice with which am
charged? | grant you that / manifested
strong Indignation. but not malice
But even II IL could be shown that
was actuated by malice, would that dis
prove the truth OF the charges against
Frank A. Matthews?
with the true instinct Of the criminal
lawyer. his counsel has sought to have
you try every one except the defendant.
He has tried TO put me on trial and he has
sought to put Meinhold and Nash on trial,
but he has evaded all direct issue with the
charges against Frank A. Matthews.
'In closing l would, therefore, remind
you that 1t is simply for you to decide:
''Did Frank A. Matthews obtain that
check with a design TO use it for my in
jury?
did he seek to induce Meinhold and
Nash to have strong pictures put in their
machines unknown to me and for my
injury?
''Did he In speaking to them of Chair
man Luther. show disrespect and insub-
ordination?
did he, for a period of several weeks,
deceive Nash and Meinhold regarding
their license fee. and in so doing deceive
them regarding the attitude of myself
and the chairman OF this board toward
that question and toward his business?
did he use the complaint against the
pictures TO carry out plot to injure me,
and did he in so doing. discriminate
against Nash as in, contrast with the
other one-cent vaudeville place, which
would be an act of oppression?
was he responsible either directly or
through his agents for the final intimida-
ton OF my witness Nash?
IF guilty of one or more of these acts
contend that Frank A. Matthews de-
serves the severest penalty provided for
In Rule IL. and that he is no longer
worthy TO be intrusted with the high pow
ers OF chief OF police"
Al the conclusion of Mr. Cristy's ar
gument, the board adjourned subject
to the call OF the chair
CLOTH WAS STOLEN
he ~