Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-05-07
M'NIFF HEARING
Got Staried To-Day in ibe Su.
 perlor Court.

The case of Miles McNiff against
 the city for restoration to the po-
 lice department and the benefits of
 the police pension fund was taken
 up by Judge Ralph Wheeler in the
 superior court yesterday afternoon
 about 3::3O o'clock. It was in 1905
 during the administration of Mayor
 John P. Elton, and when the board
 of public safety consisted of George
 A. Driggs, Louis Van Keuren, now
 Of Bridgeport, and Alderman Buck,
 republicans, Michael J. Daly, de-
 ceased and John H. Moran, demo-
 crats, that MT McNiff was dis
 charged from the police force.
 It was his contention that
 the action of the board was based on something that did not per-
 tain at all to him as a policeman
 and that the board went out of his
 way and illegally at that, to do
 what it did. He appealed from that
 action of the board on the grounds that its course was dictated by po-
 litical prejudice, that he was not all lowed legal counsel, not given fair and impartial trial, that the board had no lawful right to inquire into his conduct Tn matters not relating to him officially, that he was de- prived of the benefits of the police pension fund, that one member of the board was biased and that the charges made were not proved. To these there was a general denial.
 Attorney John, O'Neill was then sworn and he testified that he went to the meeting of the board of safety at which the officer was dis missed to represent McNiff and he was informed that lawyers would not be allowed to represent either side of the case. A vote to this ef- feet had been taken at a previous meeting and the board voted to stand by that vote. According to MT O'Neill's testimony McNiff informed the board that he had Thomas w. Walsh, court stenographer, present to take" the meeting and he was told that the board had its own sten- | ographer and no other would be al- | lowed. McNiff then said he wished | to be heard personally and one | of the board told him that | they had heard enough from him and | he was excused. This last was af- ter hearing the evidence, and the | board went into executive session.
 MT O'Neill was asked if McNiff | did not state to the board I've been 20 years on the force and never before has there been a complaint against me-" and if Commissioner Driggs did not say Well, there'll never be another against you," and answer was that such re- marks were made. { Laughter, even MT Driggs, sitting in the back seats with ex-Mayor Elton, laughed heart ly at this.
 Attorney 0'Neill then undertook o introduce newspaper article in order to refresh witness's memory. Attorney Root objected and after a yrangle the article was ruled in. In act, several objections raised by MT Root at this juncture about this article were all over .uled. Witness said the article was a correct report of the meeting of the board. He said he McNiff objecting to one member of the board hearing the ,ase and his objection was over uled by Mayor Elton.
 McNiff then took thest and tes- flied that he was appointed on the 'olice force February 19. 1884. The harges preferred against him were lot in writing and bore no names. which is contrary to the rules of the 'oard, and that he received no mo- ice of his dismissal.
 To-day's proceedings began with ,dward l.. Futile on the stand testi- ying to the existence of the police ension fund and that the same con- ist of $15,000 bonds and $1,600.S5 ash.
 Ex-Mayor John P. Elton then took he stand and testified to the record f the hearing at which McNiff was ismissed from the force. He ad- litted that the charges were formed [ the meeting held previous to the ieeting at which the discharge was oted. The trial took place on november 3, 1905, a year after the alleged had taken place, nd by which time everything had { cen adjusted There was some diff i erences between Mir o'Neill and Mir
 oot over the records and Mir O'NeilI f Iaimed they were necessary to the i lse to show that the board was orrupt and preiudiced and that the laintih was dismissed because of sputed activity in the election 2 hich defeated Elton and elected I hons. The records were admitted } evidence and they showed that r le plaintiff McNiff objected to one [ ember hearing the case. Mir Elton len said that so far as he was 4 ware MeNiff was deprived Of no | ghts at the hearing. He did not scalI Commissioner Driggs saying , him, Well. you'll never have an- a her charge preferred against you. | ou are excused" He did not think Driggs was in a tenn sr when he said this. L
 Veteran Policeman Michael Sulli- m was the next witness. He was P
 member of the Catholic Legion {, cal lodge. of whhh McNif was Ie collector. Mir O'Neill said he ould show by this mans evidence D lat he testified at the McNiff hear 6 to something he did not know: fI lat he was under a misconception, ' ld 10 show that the board was at ast irregular in charging McNii m 10 k f4f s.s |