New-York tribune., 1921-09-29
One of Inspectors Force
Accused of Wire Tap
ping in Private Suit
by Witness at Probe
Apartment House
Purchase Revealed
Lawyer Says That Dwyer
Got Property; Hughes's
Stock Account Is Barred

charge of police reserves at Headquar-
ters, was accused in testimony before
the Meyer investigating committee yes
terday of having engaged in wire-tap-
ping operations in connection with
separation suit involving persons in
| private life.
Inspector Dwyer's name was repeat
ediy brought into the record one wit
ness reluctantly furnishing the in
formation that about the time the wires
tapping operations were proceeding. or
shortly thereafter, in the summer or
fall Of 1920, the inspector had pur~
chased an elaborately appointed apart
ment house at 403 West 115th Street
for approximately s154.O00.
House Named in Complaint
This place was brought into the lines
light some weeks ago when nurses
living there alleged oppression OH the
part of Inspector Dwyer and his SON
because of their refusal to pay in
creases in rent. The inspector at that
time swore that he did not own the
property, but that his son, James, had
AN interest in it.
The wire-tapping affair and In
spector Dwyer's alleged purchase of
the 10th Street property were dis
| closed by Byram l.. Winters, an attor-
ney, who was formerly associated with
the law firm of Leslie & Winters.
Rector Street.
Winters said that while he was still
member of the firm early in 1920 ba
was acting as counsel in the separation
SUIT OF DR.. Charles L. Alters versus
Olga Alters, and that two men, John
W. Sutter and James Shaw. were en-
ployed by the firm to trail Dr. Alters
for the defendant. Sutter, he said, was
a patrolman in the Office of Inspector
Dwyer, while Shaw, a chauffeur, was
Suffers brother-in-law.
The men were continued at the work
for about a year, he said, when he
learned from them that they had been
tapping the wires that ran into DR..
Alers's house at st. George, Staten
Island. Winters refused to use the in
formation obtained by the men in this
way, he said, because it was obtained
illegally.
Alleged Tapping of Wires
! Shaw told him, the witness testified.
that the actual tapping had been done
| by Sutter, who, according to the evi-
dence, had been detailed to plain
cioCheS duty IN. staten Island about
that time under Inspector Dwyer
1t was also brought out that while
! Sutter was declared to be drawing paw
as member of the police for,e he
and Shaw were receiving $40 q week
for their alleged services in connection
with their work for the Leslie &
Winters firm.
! Winters said that about the summer
or fall of 1920 he was witness to the
transactions wherein Inspector Dwyer
obtained possession, by purchase. of
the 115th Street house for about S154.-
600. He said he witnessed the contract
and that the inspector paid $4,000 or
! SIT, 900 down as first payment, and a
total of about $4,000 within thirty
days. He obtained a mortgage for the
remainder, said Winters. The prop
erty was shortly thereafter conveyed
to William Leslie, father of Warren
Leslie, the member of the law firm of
Leslie & Winters, and later trans
ferred to the Park Court Realty Com
pany, organized in Leslie's office, of
which the directors were Warren
Leslie, Winters and Mary Schacht, sec
retary to Leslie.
Hughes Tells His Story
Former Police Inspector Edward p.
Hughes was another of the committee's
star witnesses yesterday, having been
recalled at his own request to reply to
statements of James Auditore, "mil-
honaire stevedore," that Hughes had
told him that Commissioner of Police
Enright was associated with the former
inspector in the business of watching
and policing piers. Hughes denied that
Commissioner Enright was "6fty
fifty" partner in the. Edward Hughes
Detective Service, or that he was in
any way associated with him in the
/ business of dock policing. He insisted
that Auditore's story was false in every
particular.
In the course of the examination Of
Hughes by Elon r. Brown, chief coun-
sci to the committee, it developed that
the former Inspector was heavy
speculator in stocks, running an ex-
tensive account with the firm of Allan
A. Ryan, the Special Deputy Police
Commissioner who is said to have given
$4,000 to Commissioner Enright as the
result of fictitious stock transac-
ton
Stock Deals With Ryan
The accounts produced in evidence
showed that prior to February %. 1918.
when he was retired from the Police
Department, his total dealings in Wall
Street with the firm of Allan A. Ryan
O. 20. amounted to $Z,324.14. Tho deal
ings in 1918 increased to $1,000. In
1919 they leaped TO S105 900.
In connection with the operations oN
Hughes in the Brooklyn Rapid Transit
strike of 1919 and at other times in
1920. NJ. Brown pointed to Hughes
having made Withdrawals of large sums
Of money from his bank holdings which
the latter could not explain or account
for on the witness stand. The detailed
statement by the committee counsel
included withdrawal of $4,000 in An.
gust. 1919; $4,000 in December, 1919:
$4,000 in September of 1920 and $500
in August, 1919, totaling abou. $24 800.
Mr.. Brown said he would question
Hughes about where this money wers.
Auditore followed Hughes on tho
stand and repeated the story he told
about the alleged hughes -Enright part
nership.
Winters said he was a member
OF the Assembly in 1905 and 1907.
He testified that he had been associated
with the Leslie since the middle OF the
summer of 1919 and that he remained
with the firm until january 1921. Ii
developed that he is suing Leslie for
$4,000 for services in connection with
lhis work on the Alters separation suit