The Northwest enterprise. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1931-1952, 1939-06-09
Paschal, Stevenson Begin
Fight For Reinstatement

The application of former police
officers Fred H. Paschal and w. F.
Stevenson began before the Civil
Service Commission in the council
chambers at 2:45 Wednesday. At
torney Joseph Sweeny represented
w. f. Stevenson, E. Chavelle for
Fred H. Paschal and Corporation
Counsel for the Civil Service Com
mission. Henry Elliott Jr., pres
ident of the Civil Service Commits
sion. is conducting the proceedings.
The first witness called was VIM.
Sears, chief of police, in behalf of
Stevenson. He testified to his
good record. At this point, Ber-
nard Reiter, attorney for the
NAACP, ELECTED a ruling that the
burden of proof in the application
for reinstatement rested with the
officers.
Attorney Henry Clay Agnew,
who was Deputy Prosecutor at
the time of the trial, was called.
After identifying a letter favoring
the pardon of the officers, he said
that, aside from other charges,
he felt that they should not be
sentenced to the penitentiary for
manslaughter. Asked by president
Elliott what he meant by other
charges, he stated that they had
committed perjury and guilty of
tampering with witnesses and that
officer Paschal refused to make
any statement to him concerning
the murder.
Rev. E. Attebury was called on
behalf of Paschal. He testified
that all his work to save the Of
ficers was voluntary, and that the
officers records and regulations
were good. He was asked by the
Commission if he condoned the Of
fence of perjury and tampering
with witnesses. He said he did
not make any investigation, of
that but he didn't condone that
offence.
Former Police Judge VIM. r.
Bell, Capt. Norton, Sergeants Crit
fin and Wilson, Immigration Of
ficers John P. Boyd and John P.
Phillips, Mr.. and Mrs. MUTT of the
Richmond Hotel were character
witnesses.
Fred H. Paschal proved his own
best witness. Following his array
of character witnesses, it was an
easy matter to prove himself zone
of the finest" and never was he
admonished for brutality? After
he was excused from the witness
stand, his only imperfection was
his memory. Everybody was glad
to hear the Commission adjourn
the hearing till 2 P. NJ Thursday
Thursday, 2 P. M. Trial Resumes
Paschal continued his testimony
Referring to the Follings case: at
the time of the trial he was asked
Were you ever convicted of man.
slaughter answered he was
forced against his will to answer
yes" He testified that while the
jury was locked up in the Lawson
case, Stevenson told him he (Stev-
enson) had testified falsely about
not knowing what happened in the
police station at the time Lawson
was taken there. That Stevenson
stated that he did see what hap
pened. He testified that, some
Negroes were good and that some
were bad; that he had many good
friends among them and who desir-
ed and did come to his home to
aid him in his difficulties, if they
but dared. Paschal again suffers
from lapse of memory: He testif-
led that he never saw the witness
Downs until the day of the inquest;
denied he was at the Roma Cafe;
denied that he was in the car with
Downs, Whalen and Stevenson.
CThe Chairman of the commission
remarked that some of the state
ments made there would have to
be taken with salt.) He was ask
ed why he did not have some of
his statements corroborated, said
he never felt it necessary.
The next witness called was
Matsuoke Hayashi, Japanese hotel
keeper, in behalf of Paschal. Mr..
Hayashi did not understand Eng
fish very well, and spoke at it. He
seemed not to understand anyone,
nor did any one understand him.
Attorney Chavelle, representing
Paschal, asked him this question:
"And was this the niger boy you
asked to have the officers take
down ?" Everybody, even the jap
anese understood that. Attorney
Chenille rested.