The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-05-03

worth offered no objection to the admission of the records as evil dence. He suggested that they be read to the jury, when Wareing in sisted that he would have to return them to New York tonight.
 Photostatic Copies
 At the suggestion of Judge Inglis, however, photostatic copies Of the records will be made and shown to the jury this afternoon.
 DO you recognize John Purdle, the accused in this room?" asked Alcorn of Wareing.
 "Yes, do," was the reply. When Wareing was asked to point Purdie out, the latter stood. The witness said that one of the papers he brought to the trial at the request of the state, an application by Pur- die for license, contained Purd1es picture.
 Under cross-examination by At torney Ashworth, the witness said that the purpose of having investl- gators licensed in New York is for the protection of the public.
 Must Have Clear Record
 And to get license man must have a clear record, is that correct?" asked Ashworth.
 "That's true," agreed Wareing.
 "Mr. Purdie has a license?" asked Ashworth.
 "Yes," said Wareing, "he has a license, in fact he has two of them" :" He pointed out that Purdie also holds license under @ trade name.
 Exhibits Presented
 Before any witness was called to the stand this morning, Alcorn in- troduced as exhibits 262 of the 1886 exchange sheets of the Waterbury Trust company, which he offered initially last Friday. Defense coun- sei clashed several times with the special prosecutor over the admiss- ibility of the evidence, which Alcorn claims will be connected by Account ant Warren M. Brown, when he takes the stand.
 More than 100 sheets, which Heebner described as containing in- formation as to checks drawn on the Citizens & Manufacturers National bank, but cashed at other places, were introduced in evidence, also over strenuous defense objections. Heebner was on the stand for a brief period.
 Testimony which will be given by Police Commissioner Sunderland will also pertain to John B. Purdie, who allegedly received more than $10000 from the city Of Waterbury, according to the grand jury, for being official snooper" during the elections of 1885 and 1897 for Mayor Hayes and former Controller Leary.
 The hiring of Purdie, according to the grand jury, was a violation of law, which provides that no special investigators will be hired by city officials without consent of other public police officials.
 It is in this capacity that Sunder- land will testify. He is expected to be replaced before June,. when his term as police commissioner expires.
 Awaiting Call
 Former Mayor Guilfoile, Former Mayor Thoms, Former City Court Judge McGrath, and aHrtford's Mayor Thomas Spe1lacy will be called upon by the state to testify concerning services rendered to the city for the fees they received dur ing the years 1931-1937. Attorney Herman J. Weisman, who was cal- led yesterday as witness, for ap- parently the same purpose, was not in court today.
 The grand jury said, concerning Mayor Spellacy, former assistant attorney general, For many years a close personal friend of Mayor Hayes and of Controller Leary, and heavy stockholder in the Electric Steam Sterilizer Company, a pri- vate enterprise of Leary's has been Thomas J. Spellacy, Mayor of Hart ford. In 1885 the law firm of Spell lacy, Ryan and Yeomans received $11,000 from the City of Waterbury, in part for MT. Spellacy's services in holding the Democratic members of the General Assembly together in legislative matters.
 His employment by the mayor and the controller was violation by them of the city charter. The grand jury has discovered no legitimate reason nor legal justification for the expenditure of this large sum of the city's money for this purpose. The services were not of such nature as to have required payment of any money by the city to any person"
 Additional Payment
 Since the trial started, however, the state has alleged an additional payment of $2,500 to the Spellacy firm, by the city.
 Prom 1881 to 1887 inclusive, pay- ments were made to w. E. Thoms and his firm (Carmody & Thoms) aggregating approximately $780, 708.70," the grand jury stated. It is in connection with this and the claim by the grand jury "It is the opinion of the grand jury that such services as were rendered by Thoms were properly the function of the corporation counsel and his staff," that former Mayor Thoms is sub poenaed.
 Paid to Levy sIt is significant" the grand jury continued, that during the eight years of the Hayes-Leary admins fration over $l25.00O of the city's money was paid to Edward G. Levy for alleged services in securing re- auctions in light and power for the city of Waterbury. During those same years, William E. Thoms re- ceived over si30,000 from the city of Waterbury for the services of Mir.