New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-01-23
"a INDICTMENTS In
SUFFOLK COUNTY
Continued from first page.

Continued from hrst page.
variations indicted, but II leaked out
tnet the indictments represent the Dig
rest bunch OF road graft cases tha'
have been turned in since the highway
investigation began. and In coheratu-
lating the jury on It's Work Justice
Hammer said that while he knew they
were the result OF honest investigation
.hev had been found on unanswered
and unexplained testimony which may
be answered later"
uo had fixed bail. he said. and those
indicted would be arraigned before JUS
ttce Kelbv on the first Monday In Feb
rusrv. Justice Kapper said he would
hold a special term of court on the sec
ond Monday in April TO try the cases
The indictments were not presented
70 the court until 30 o'clock because
| NJ an all-afternoon wrangle over IN
Guiding in the presentation resolution
landing William Sulzer and protesting
against his impeachment. and also over
the indictment Of the Dunbar Contract
ing COMPANY. At 80 o'clock the jury
had apparently completed its work, and
the court was ready to receive II, wnen
It was learned that the Dunbar com
many and one or two others were not
IN the list. After some hurried con-
ferences the jury went into session
again.
I The result was. It is said, that the
contracting company was soon indicted
| II could not be learned who intro
duced the Sulzer resolution. but James
W. Eaton, Of East Islip, the foreman
who was the Sulzer candidate Tor AS
semblv in the I'd District last fall, was
suspected of II. According 10 leaks
the original resolution was n forim-
6able affair OF two pages. It was tanned
down however, and shown to justice
Kapper. who promptly declined to ac-
cept any such presentment.
All Parties in Net.
Included in to-day's indictments IL
is said. are Tammany men, Repub-
! licans and Suzer men. Hubbard ana
Raylies are close friends of Charles +.
Mnrphv. and are looked upon as his
lieutenants in Suffolk County. Lyncn,
Huber. Scanlon and Kinney, OF the
Suffolk Construction Company, are
classed as the Sulzer men.
The presentment OF the jury REFER
ring TO the conduct Of the Highways
DEPARTMENT in 1911 and 1912. says the
officials OF the State Highways Depart
rnent were inefficient and permitted
condition TO exist by which cheats and
frauds existed, and that contracts were
given out to those having political in
fuence without regard to the integrity
OF the individual and with no regard to
contract conditions which would safe
guard the state.
THAT as q result thereof the people
of the state have lost many thousands
Of dollars. and II such conditions arc
permitted 10 continue Il Will be ques-
ton of only a short time when the
cost for the repairing and rebuilding or
the roads Of the state will amount TO
such a sum Of money that the taxpay-
ers will be unable 10 carry the burden.
I'VE recommend that a thorough in
yestigation be conducted by those who
have statewide powers In order that
the proper and necessary evidence can
be obtained for submission for criminal
prosecution.
THAT action Immediately be taken
by the state government TO prevent the
further payment OF estimates OF state
roads until the roads can be thor
oughly and efficiently investigated"
Attention is also called TO two other
roads. the construction OF which the
coming grand jury is asked 10 investi-
gate.
Mr.. Hennessy was Jubilant over the
indictments, and in his challenge TO
Mr.. Osborne to keep 10 the trail ne had
set pointed out that S2,OOo0O0 could be
saved the state II he did so.
The conditions found in Suffolk
County can be discovered in at least
fifty Of the sixty-two counties OF the
} state" he said. Hearing witnesses in
John Doe proceedings may illustrate
the several degrees Of graft. but won't
! lead 10 indictments and convictions.
The way to go after the guilty is 10
get the physical proof out OF the roads
and have il obtained by experts whose
testimony cannot be broken down.
II undertook these Suffolk County
cases. as did several soon TO he heard
from in another county, because. hav-
ing presented them TO district attorneys
before my activities were stopped,
felt I was under a moral obligation 10
20 through with them and give the
prosecuting officers all assistance pos
sible.
| "Other road cases. prepared b. me