The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-03-17
Moore Replaces Purcell As Witness For State
No Personal Grudges
 Against Mayor, Leary
Purcell States Attitude Toward Officials as He Com
 petes His Testimony Defense Loses Motion

corporation counsel's office, took but brief period of time.
 A check for $8z, placed on ex- hibition by the defense, as payable to Purcell, and not approved by the board of finance, was shown under the redirect, as having been given to Purcell to attend a convention of the association of Municipal Fi- nance Officers at Toronto, Canada, September, 1884.
 The $84, Purcell said, was for ex- penses, including travel, meals, hotel, incidentals, and membership in the association.
 Attorney Murray brought out that the check was not made out on the pin-point machine, and that it actu- ally violated every fundamental rule of the board of finance which had been mentioned by the state with reference to other payments.
 In answer to a question on the funny-bone side. by Attorney Mo- Donough, Purcell denied that when he was in Canada, he had visited the Dionne quintuplets.
 Moore Called
 Following the overruling of the motions to strike out Purcell's testi- mony, Special Prosecutor Alcorn called Joseph Moore to the stand.
 A former employe of the Connecti- cut company, the witness stated that he went to work in 1886 for the Con- necticut Supply company, located at 198 Mill street.
 In 1886, he said the equipment of the company, which received more than $l00,000 from the city for serv- ices allegedly rendered, consisted of compressor, shovel, contractors tools, and three two-ton dump trucks.
 Moore's testimony included state- ments that he was hired at the Con- necticut Supply company by the late Francis J. Fruin, at $20 a week. John Luskay, brother-in-law of Fruin, was also employed there, he said.
 He did not know that Fruin had once been chauffeur to Daniel J. Leary, although he recalled that the man had once operated Lake Quas- sapaug.
 A flutter of laughter arose from the gallery when Alcorn asked the witness if he had ever known Frankie Burns as a boxer. Moore said that he only know the defend- antas contractor and restaurant owner. He did not know why he had assumed the name of Burns, instead of Santalucia
 Trucks other than those owned by Santalucia were hired by him for contracting purposes, Moore said but as no books were kept by the company he could not supply the names of the owners of the trucks The company did work aside from that on contract for the city, but again no names could be supplied
 Took Orders
 Moore said that he took orders from Santalucia from the start oi 1897, and that from his personal knowledge he could say Santalucia had no interest in the company prior to that.
 Alcorn attempted to draw from Moore statements concerning the rapid return here from Texas by Controller Leary, at the time of the death of Fruin, in February. l937 Moore said that he saw Leary at the funeral but had not known he had been out of town.
 As court adjourned yesterday, the prosecutor was reading to the jury four papers signed February 27, 1887, by Moore, Carl D. Olsen, Henry Minor and Luskay, containing what appeared to be inventories of the Connecticut Supply company. At the top of each was "on half and half basis. Burns and Fruin."
 Moore said that he had prepared the papers at the request of Olsen, who was administrator of the estate of Fruin.