The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-04-14

 Crawford was attending confer ence of the trustees of Howard Uni- versity, Washington, D. c. Howard is one of the outstanding negro col- leges in the country. Crawford ap- pears for Simon J. Alderman of New Haven, an accountant on trial.
 Conference Held
 Just before 10 o'clock, the usual time for the opening of court, several members of the defense counsel were noted in deep conference.
 At that time, Attorneys Patrick Healey and James D. 0. Murray entered the chambers of Judge Irglis for conference.
 Shortly, Attorney John H. Cas- sidy and other members of the de- fense staff joined in the chambers conference.
 At 1O:30 o'clock, all counsel emerged from the judges cham bers, and Judge Inglis took his place on the bench, asking Attorney Murray if he were ready.
 Looking about the court room at the other members of the defense staff, Attorney Murray stepped up to the judges bench for conference. Judge Inglis could be heard voicing his anxiety ito get on."
 Harry Mackenzie, who had been on the stand the past three days entered the courtroom and started toward the witness stand, but his counsel, William L. Hadden halted him and shunted him to seat.
 Attorney Murray, speaking to Judge Inglis, said, ". if your honor will give us one half hour more?" Judge Inglis complied and adjourned court until II a. m.
 "AH This Delay"
 When court resumed at II o'clock, Special Prosecutor Alcorn called upon Murray for statement as to whether or not he intended to read the grand jury testimony of Mackenzie, after all this delay"
 T have no answer to make at this time," said Murray, not com- mitting himself. q wish to con- tinue my cross-examination."
 Judge Inglis looked up briefly and said, You may proceed"
 Mackenzie was back on the stand, ready for further cross-examination. Questions asked by Murray were along the line of whether or not he had any personal knowledge that Williamson had received only the amounts he claimed to have received in the alleged splits with Leary.
 Mackenzie said he had not seen the check for $12,000 split in Feb- ruary, 1885 or the 5000 check spl. in March. He admitted that he took Williamson's word that he re- ceived only $6,000 in the first in- stance and $4,5O0 in the latter in- stance"
 He admitted that he had no defi- mite knowledge that Williamson did not get the whole 5000.
 "Disagrees"
 Mackenzie said that if William son said he had arranged the con- ference here in 1887 with Leary, he would disagree" with him. He said that Williamson arranged the conference.
 Murray concluded that trend of the examination by asking the witness if he had mo personal knowledge of the paymentS-only what Will iamson told him." The answer was That's correct"
 Turning then to the statement made by Mackenzie on direct eX- animation, that he was ready to tell the story to the jury regardless of the consequences" Murray asked, What consequences do you antic- ipate?"
 T don't know" was the reply.
 Mackenzie admitted that some thing might happen to mel might get punishment of some kind"
 Do you expect to go to jail?"
 q hope I don't" was the reply.
 What could you expect but jail as runishment?" Murray continued.
 T think what I've been through already is punishment" was the answer
 50 if you got to jail-you'n go satistied?" continued Murray.
 Well, if I go to jail, I'll have to go," Mackenzie said.
 Returning to the fee splitting, Murray asked Mackenzie if he knew as matter of fact if Will Hanson got the full amount?"
 Only what heard at Danbury," replied the witness.
 The witness said that the amounts of the splits were discussed at the conference at Danbury with Will iamson and Leary.
 Do you know you pleaded guilty to conspiracy to be a thief?" asked the cross-examiner.
 If you put it that way" was the answer.
 Done Wrong"
 Do you think you are thief?"
 The answer was mo-"
 q know I've done something wrong
 Mackenzie continued:
 When Murray pounded away at the word "thievery," in connection with Mackenzie. Alcorn objected that such was not the charge. Judge Inglis upheld the objections.
 Mackenzie said that he knows the penalty for pleadiig guilty to the charge and twill have to accept it If I get it."
 What reward do you expect from the state for your testimony" he was asked.
 I don't know thing about it." the witness said, but he admitted he had thought about it.
 T surely care," he said.
 When asked if he expected len- iency in return for his testimony, the witness replied, Well, I done wrong and I'm sorry for it." He continued that he had never com- mitted any wrong for which he had not paid. He cleared the statement by saying wrongs could be commit ted without breaking the law.
 Peck Questions
 Attorney Josiah H. Peck took over the cross-examination at that point and htoiiUht from the witnase that