The Bridgeport evening farmer. [volume] (Bridgeport, Conn.) 1866-1917, 1911-05-12
M'KENNA
CONCLUDES
TESTIMONY
First Assistant Murray, as Wit
ness For the Defense, Shows
That Work of Department
Was Well Done
Alderman Paddock Protests
Against Constant Wrangling
of Lawyers, as Delaying the
Proceedings

| who laid concrete for the Connecticut
CO. in Stratford avenue. last year, the
| investigation of the office of the city
engineer which has been prolonged for
many weeks, was concluded last night.
Biltz is expected home before Sunday.
He is wanted to testify relative to
whether his employees working the
| Connecticut Co.'S portion of Stratford
avenue were placed upon the city pay
roll instead of being paid in the usual
| way. City Engineer McKenna has
| denied that this was done. so far as
he knows, and he says it is his belief
| that the city did not bear the cost
| of this work
McKenna was the principal witness
| last evening. With the exception of
| intervals of a few minutes, he occu-
| pied the witness stand throughout the
| evening, undergoing most of the time
! a cross-examination by Attorney Jud-
| son. Attorney Klein took him in hand
for redirect examination. and then the
lawyers took turns in plying him with
| questions
| Other witnesses were Arthur F.
Williams, city editor Of the Telegram
and William D. Murray. assistant en-
gineer. The session of last evening
was particularly devoid of new mater
! ial, practically the entire evening be-
| ing devoted to rehashing subjects al
ready pretty thoroughly discussed.
| Taking up the thread of his cross
| examination. Attorney Judson asked
| McKenna when he felt that he be-
came competent to act as a full fedg-
| ed engineer. McKenna said in 1904
| 1905 and 1906 he felt he had become
equipped for such a position. He ask
| ed McKenna when he was employed
in a Turkish bath. That was 1899,
said McKenna. AT that time he went
| TO work for Scof1eld & Ford for 81 per
| day. Then he went with the Bridge
| port Hydraulic Co. for $3.50 per week,
and remained until 1905. He denied
that he was discharged by the Hy
draulic Co. because of errors in the
Huntington bridge masonry, and said
he was with the company until the
bridge was completed and there was
no further work.
Judson again sought to CLEAN from
McKenna an admission that the city
bore the expense of the Connecticut
Co.'s work in the Stratford avenue
pavement. McKenna referred his
questioner to both the city auditor and
the director of public works
Judson then hastily took up the va
rious public works that had been
brought into question, McKenna de-
MED that he had erred in Park ave-
nue. grade, and reiterated what he had
dlTedQy LOlu DIT great leIlS III DIS u IIl6
circumstances of the establishment of
grade Of Livingstone place. and the
extension of it's sewer.
At this juncture Mr.. Williams OF
the Telegram arrived and McKenna
was excused temporarily. Mr.. Will
liams was asked if he had talked with
McKenna relative to the Mulvihill
affair. He said he had. and went on
to tell that McKenna denied there had
been an assault committed, and told
him to ask the jokers at the City
Hall about the report-that it was a
joke. Klein brought out that this was
a telephone conversation. He asked
if Williams hadn't encountered gen.
tlemen who had lied to him in his
newspaper work.
Williams replied that gentlemen
do not do such things
A discussion of newspaper ethics
followed for few moments then Mr..
Williams hurried away to his desk.
McKenna denied that any charges of
his personal account had been made
against the city in connection with his
transactions with Henry Cartesen, the
liveryman.
When the Miller Motor Car Co.'S bill
was discussed, McKenna said he had
received, yesterday morning, bill for
1885. But of this there was an item
of $500 he did not believe should be
charged. He said he didn't expect to
be charged for the old Maxwell car
used while the Simplex car was laid
up. Judson asked him further about
the four items paid to F. J. w.
Schwiers, Jr, consulting engineer who
constructed the Barnum avenue
bridge. McKenna said the fact that
the name was spelled differently on
the records was due to typographical
errors, net to any wish to cover up
the transactions, and he produced by
way of proof a map of the Boston
avenue bridge, which showed that
Schweirs did not draw the plans, as
Judson had intimated. He repeated |
that the engineer was consulted mere |
ly as to stress and strain of several
bridges including the Boston avenue |
bridge, the contract for which was |
later awarded to him in competition |
with other bidders.
McKenna was questioned also as to |
his financial transactions with Abide
rian. Some time was spent in this |
discussion. and Attorney Klein had |
of the hearing, to what he termed !
Judson's "slick'' method of question:
ing. McKenna said the order to which
reference was made in connection with |
his brothers visit to Azhderian at the
Hartford sanitarium was in reality a
note. He denied that he co-erced the |
loans through withdrawing Abide
RAMS name from his payroll.
He opened up a hitherto undisclos-
ed feature of McKenzies connection
with the office when he declared that |
the reason he discharged Mckenzie
was not because that employee had
talked about the SIS check to which
reference was made during the hear
ing. but because Mckenzie, contrary
to his instructions, had taken stock in
a local contracting company.
He likewise denied that he had
to discharge Dargan if he
refused to pay money to his brother
William G. McKenna. Judson asked
him if he could imagine Mr. Scofield
as city engineer making such a re-
quest of Dargan. McKenna replied,
"The way that I asked him, yes.
can imagine man like Mr.. Scofield
doing that. He may have done it,
the same way that I did it. I simply
suggested that if he could do it it
would be very much appreciated"
Judson then asked McKenna about
his statement of his attorneys illness
when the hearing was adjourned one
evening in it's early stages, at Nc
Kennas request.
The committee ruled out the ques-
ton. After much quibbling Chairman
announced that the committee
would permit the following question:
Did you falsely state to the COM
mittee that your counsel was sick
and could not go on with the hearing
when in fact you knew he was per-
fectly well?"
not 70 |