New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1921-08-27

lnvestigating New York City during
me past week has gone to eXtraor-
binary lengths in introducing inferen-
tlal, ex-partc and unsupported testi-
mony, founded largely upon rumor and
the unsupported words Of one witness
against another
Such procedure is in violation OF
al rules relating to the presentation
OF evidence in any court in the land.
AS a result Of this procedure there
nave been spread upon the pages Of
newspapers hostile to Mayor HvIan and
ms administration half-t truths and in
lerences duplicating officials of his adj
"'n'stration in alleged wrongdoing.
Warning Given to Papers
"The Meyer committee has refused
~ majority vote to abide by the or
dlnary rules Of procedure in vogue in
the state courts. In taking this course
IL has formally Endorsed the campaign
OF mudsllnging by innucndo upon which
IL WAS launched. The action of the
meyer committee, however. does not
extend to the newspapers which nnhS
llsh the proceedings and 7 warn tha1,
70 take the utmost care and not to
draw wrong inference Of a ]ibclons
character a, affecting any official of The
the city. 0''p'0S ees o'
That this matter NAV be hroroh.
home moro forcibly to certa;1 ua., ~
papers OF New York City. | have IT,
cay INSTRUCTED my attorney, former
Judge William NJ. K. Olcott oe A1 d5o
broadway, to take action against .rr,'o
tribune, The New York Herald, and
otner publications., to recover damages
from each o. them for libel ms hS
falsc presentation Of facts in the;r
August 26. A''o"S'
""Tho New York Times,' on page I.
Go. oSiun ~. l, carried the following head:
Day Hlrshfield Aided O'Malley in Hid
ing Graft on Widow His Report
Read to Meyer COMMITTEES Om; pta
tacts on $1,000 Demand for Permit,
The New York Tribune and sThc
New ork Herald in issues of the
same date, carried in the body Of their
news columns the same and other libel
Gus infcrences, openly expressed bv
The New York Times' in its headlines
Records Of Hearing Cited
Inc records of the hearing before
me Meyer committee for Thursday.
august 20, show that | recommended
tnat Mrs. Katenkamp be given per
ili't Tor stand in the market and that
sns received 1t without paying any ono
anything, and the testimony before the
committee yesterday further shows
that the witnesses William Minder and
bertha l.. katenkamp, in an examina-
ton before me, In relation to the
hatenksnlp permit matter, on October
q, 1870, denied under oath that there
were any grounds for proceedings
against any employee Of the New York
City Department Of Markets. If Nj.
Minder had $500 of Mrs. Katenkamp's
money IN his safe, rs he testified yes
terday, then that fact was withheld
from me by both. If there was any
understanding between them and
O'Malley, they kept that away from,
me. The fact of the matter is that if
Mr.. Minder and Mrs. Katenkamp tes-
tilted truthfully before the Meyer com
mittee then their testimony before me
was untrue, and if they testified truth
fully before me then their testimony
before the committee yesterday was
untrue.
Cohen's Words Reviewed
"However, later on, on April %, 1921.
in subsequent examination before
the deputy commissioner of this office.
the same Mr.. William Minder, presi
dent OF the West Washington Market
Mercha Association, reiterated the
testlmo ny given before me on October
4, 1920, and again denied that any of
the shareholders in West Washington
Market have at any time complained
to him that they were approached or
held up for money.
ITO save this Meyer committee from
growing stale and going fat. witness
Barnett Cohen was hastily callei 20 the
stand just before recess yesterday.
Barnett Cohen is we'll known both to
this office and to the Department of
Markets. The testimony given by this
witness was calculated to impeach the
character Of Commissioner of Markets
Edwin J. OMalley and myself, and al
though Cohcn's testimony was based
upon unfounded assertions it was per-
mitted to go unchallcnged by commit
tees counsel"