New-York tribune., 1918-03-15
MacBride Accuses
Two Policemen
Of Trying Bribery
Paid ST. 500 Each to obta;,
Place on the Eligible
List, Is Charge
1oothers in Same Boat
Patrolmen Duped, Says Com,
plant to Enright; Name.
Didn't Appear
10Others in Same Boa,

In a letter to Police Comm;..;.
Enright yesterday. James E M..pN!' 'ls
president of the Municipal civ;, s.'
wee Commission, requested the snsnss W..
sion on charges of two patrolmoa 'p.A' rs.
Mr.. MacBride said, had Informed Wv ~
Commission that they had paid 81 ,@ "a,
each to certain persons for n n,.;,' si''''
of advantage among the first ',s,''0a I'M
the eligible list for promotion fr.s. VI
trolman to sergeant. 1t was s.;a ~ pa
ten other patrolnien put W. the .s~ s'
amount Of money, but when the el;rys ys
lists appeared none of the mems ns. ss''
was on it. ""''s
Commissioners MacBride exn,.;,. i,
that no member of the present ., e.
mer Civil Service Commissions was "
voived in the scandal, and that tbs y. M
llcemen in question had been aa;.
flammcd" by outside parties WIN !.
was hoped, would be run down tb,on,s
further evidence that nigh. h %
tanned at the trial of the two NJ w." v11
men. f'"o''
In requesting the Police Comm;ss;o,
er to suspend the patrolmen. Comm.
sioner MacBride said such action NJ,
necessary "in order that we NAV hross
up ring of confidence men who how
in the past pretended to be able n ~,
rupt the Civil Service Commission an ars
its staff and to sell positions on A. 4.
eligible list" A'
One Examination Cancelled
An examination for promotion t,on
patrolmen to sergeant was held in Jan.
uary. 1917, under the Mitchell admin.
islration, but was cancelled because \,
was found that through the fault !
an examiner the questions had bss
given to certain policemen. A secopj
examination was held last Nav. ami
the eligible list from this examinatju
was given out by the retiring Civil Sep|
vice Commission on December 81, lsrI
In his letter to Police Commissions
Enright yesterday Commissioner MAJ +
Bride said:
Early in January, 1918, two patre
men came to the Office of the Civil Ser
vice Commission and said that the j
had paid $1,000 each for a position i
advantage on the eligible list. Neithe /
had passed the examination. The visi /
of these men was preceded by an anony
nous letter to the acting chief elk
aminer, which one of them afterwss
admitted sending. That letter was n
ceived Oh January 8, and on January
Patroiman Joseph Z. Spellman, Shish
No. 6,671, and Patrolman George NJ !
Ccrmack, Shield No. 1927, both Of thy
281st Precinct, called on the actv I
chief examiner of this commission.
They told him they had each gw
over $1,000, part of which was to q
to- him for place on the list. TEk
told the acting chief examiner tEaF
could furnish him the names Of II !
other men who had made similar pFE
ments. They said this money M
given to an officer of the PatrolmaI&
Benevolent Association. who in tI h
was to give it to a third person for NE
ment to the acting chief examiner IaE
acting chief examiner immediate 8
brought the matter to my attention, af
Spellman and Mccormack were sui
moned to appear before this comms&
sion"
Declined to Answer Questions &
Commissioner MacBride said tFaE
the two patrolmen appeared before III
commission accompanied by counaE
but declined to answer questions t
the ground that it might tend to u
criminate them. They told their Orgy
nal story TO Acting Chief ExamlHsE
Murray. 1t appears that they went Il
him to find out why their names lsSl
not been put on the eligible list 4
matter was first called to the atttE
tion of former Police Commission
Bugher, was later taken up by .ol5I
missioner Enright, and Commission 8
MacBride's letter yesterday was
reply to a report on the matter ~ VI
Enright The latter reported A
Chief Examiner Murray had appel
before the borough inspector Of br0E
lyn and Queens and repeated the s''E
the two patrolmen had told nm. y N
The two patrolmen were tneh ca q #
before the borough inspector, anu
first declined to answer questions, IA
the advice of counsel. finaliy
said that when they visited the aea
chief examlnar of the Clvil ser
Commission the only subject OF III
versation was how they could spr
to the commission for rerauns
what could these men or - u
counsel find discriminating IN susi
conversation >" Commissioner III
Bride asked in his letter to Oons ~
sioner Enright. III they have no. ~ y
suspended and arc not under cns1s
I desire, as president of the clvil s..s, : 81
vice Commission, to prefer f.. Id
against these men and ASK -"
suspension." "a