Los Angeles herald., 1907-09-25


At the afternoon session the memory
OF Lonergan was several times at fault.
He would neither affirm nor deny that he
had discussed with his former employer
Mr.. Foley his chance to make over
100000 during his term of office.
II may have said zach thing In
joking manner he explained.
After testing the accuracy OF Loner-
gan's memory Rogers proceeded to in
stitute comparisons of Lonergan's testi-
mony at the present trial and at the
last Glass trial.
His most important admission was most
unexpected. In the course of cross exam
nation Rogers suddenly asked:
would you have voted for this troll
ley ordinance If you had not been paid
for it?'
1T think 1 should have voted for It,"
was the reply.
Heney made objection to the defense
going into the matter of prior motives,
but the answer stood.
The cross examination was temper
arily suspended while Heney questioned
the witness about the payment of $1,000
by Supervisor Gallagher, regarding which
Lonergan had previously attempted to
correct himself. This matter being evil
IDENTIFY Strengthened out to the satisfac-
ton of the prosecutor, the latter took up
Lonergans acquaintance with Roy.
Under questions from Heney Lonergan
gave the substance of an interview with
Detective Burns of the prosecution dur
ing the noon Hour. Rogers made refer
ence to the affair and Heney asked what
the conversation was about.
Followed by Detective
Lonergan testified that he had COM
planned to Burns about man who was
FL In rxyhn rva fod nut
in the court by Heney and described as
a detective for the Southern Pacific rail-
road.
Another topic of conversation with
Burns was an incident which is alleged
to have occurred last night. Lopergan
related that a man named Walton had
summoned him about p. m. by telephone
and invited him to go for an automobile
ride with two women. Heney asked IL
this man was not the same who had
secured an interview with Lonergan and
had afterward turned It over to At
torney Rogers of the defense. On q
previous occasion, according to the wit
ness, Walton had taken his wife and
children out for an automobile ride and
on two or more evenings he had repeated
the excursion. Last night, however, Lon
ergan, extended the invitation by Walton,
had summoned Detective Burns by tel
ton and the two women until Burns could
arrive. Lonergan stated that Walton,
who sat in the pew reserved for Of
ficials of the United Railroads and their
attorneys had said they would go down
the line, but made no mention of any
one they might meet
With this the examination closed and
Rogers asked the identification of a news
paper interview purporting to contain
RA- ef@,. 1~rr
not admit that he was not telling the
truth when he gave the interviews and
he LETT the stand without any further dis
closures of Importance.
Gallagher on the Stand
Gallagher declared that Ruef had first
approached him on the matter of an
overhead trolley early in April. 1906; that
Ruef had on this occasion asked Gal
lagher to ascertain the attitude of the
members of the board toward the trolley
ordinance, and what amounts they would
insist upon in consideration of support
ing such measure. Gallagher continued:
again before the fire Ruef told me
that the United Railroads desired such
franchise and asked me to ascertain
how the members stood. 1 investigated
and reported to him that 1 was satisfied
the ordinance could be passed, and asked
how much he could allow. Ruef replied
that the votes would be worth $4,000, and
it was agreed that the amount to be paid
me would be settled later. I asked Will
son, Mamlock and Furey If the sum of
$4,000 would be satisfactory in exchange
for their votes
Wilson 1 told him that 1 thought he
should reserve $4,000 for his services IN
arranging the matter with members of
the board. 1 reported this to Ruef and
he agreed with me. This conversation
took place about a week before the pass
age of the ordinance In conference
with Ruef it was agreed that my own
compensation should be $4,000"
About ten days before the passage of
the ordinance, according to Gallagher's
testimony, he had met Patrick Calhoun
at luncheon given in one of the car
barns. Ruef and several of the super
visors were in attendance, and the wit
ness was introduced to Calhoun.
Gallagher was then asked:
did Ruef give you any money in con-
nection with this matter subsequent to
the passage of this ordinance?"
Yes, SIR replied Gallagher
state to the jury what money Mr.. Ruef
gave you, and when and where
Gave Him $485,ooo
"Ruef gave me altogether $4S5,O00. This
was In separated amounts.
How many supervisors were to have
$4,000 apiece out of that?"
Il told Ruef all the members of the
board were agreeable to $4,000 with the
exception of Wilson. myself and Rea, with
whom 1 did not desire to talk over the
matter. That left fifteen members who
were to receive $4,000 apiece
How was this money paid to you by
Ruef?"
1.-THE sum of $4,000 was given to me in
July, and that was in two or three pay
ments. The money was in small bills,
from 81 to $40 in denomination. These
payments were made at Ruef's Office
Altogether this money made several large
packages, as about one tenth of the money
was 81 and 81 bills. received the last Of
the $4,000 about the last of July and
distributed one~half of the payments
agreed upon to the various members who
were to receive them
''I took one-half the sum for each mem
Der / was dealing with, placed 1t in an
envelope and handed 1t to the member in
question. 1 cannot remember in what
order or where these payments were
made.
az remember giving Sunervisor Toner-