Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1948-01-30
Murphy
Continued From First Page.)

use of language set forth in three
of the five rough language" counts
of the indictment.
Dealing with one of these Incl
dents, in which Chief Murphy was
accused of having sworn at Pvt.
Frank w. Cummins and 1t. Eugene
]. Heiss at an airport fire on Au-
gust 10, 1916, the board wrote:
"We are called upon to decide
whether or not the language con-
cededly used by the respondent
under the circumstances Is such as
would be ordinarily understood by
men in the ordinary walks of life
and under similar circumstances as
being such as to offend ones feel
ings or sensibilities or whether it
is indicate.
1.-THE board does not think, view
ing the situation as the evidence in
the case presents itself to us, that
the language was harsh, coarse,
violent or abusive as charged. HUI
man lives were thought to be at
stake and the circumstances called
for prompt action which, we think,
was adequately ordered by the
respondent in line with his duties
In this instance, Chief Murphy
had been brought to book for hav-
ing told Lit Heiss, damn 1t,
you're using the wrong nozzle" and
for having told Pvt. Cummins to
ooot tho bollD IN .rrork
"Obscene" Expression Common.
In the case of a charge accusing
the chief of having used obscene
language to 1t. William r. Sweeney
on another occasion, the board
found that "the expression used
was one used by men in the every
day walk of life
Having read the opinion, Mr. Can
field addressed extemporaneous
thanks to, attorneys for both, sides
in the way they had handled the
case. He particularly praised the
work of Daniel B. Maher, special as
sistant corporation counsel and
prosecutor. who, he said, had done
a thorough, intelligent job, de-
serving not only the thanks of the
Commissioners who assigned him to
this trial but the thanks of every
body in the District of Columbia"
Chief Murphy was defended by
Attorney Martin F. O'Donoghue.
In a preamble to its conclusions,
the board made plain that the pros.
ecution had not been required in
this case to prove Chief Murphy's
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt"
The board said a verdict of guilty
could have been sustained on any
count in which the prosecution was
able to produce "a fair preponder-
ance of the evidence"
Witnesses Praised.
In recommending that Chief
Murphy try to iron out differences
in his department by comforting
with those who have testified
again. him, the board said it had
been impressed by "the apparent
friendliness and respect existing
between most of the prosecution
and defense witnesses in the case.
I'VE were impressed,* the board
wrote, with the high caliber of the
men who testified against Chief
Murphy and the respect each side
seems to have for the other, so far
as courage, ability and devotion to-
duty are concerned"
The trial of the fire chief lasted
two weeks, from January IL to last
Monday.
Chief Murphy was Indicted on
general charge that he was ineff1-
Gent and unfit for his position and
had lowered the fire departments
morale. The charges proceeded
with listing of nine ways in which
the lowering of morale had been
effected and the unfitness mani
tested.
Some Changes Made.
Originally, there had been 13l
points in the list of the fire chiefs
alleged misdeeds. In the course of
pre-trial legal maneuverings and
during the trial itself, however, five
of these counts were dismissed by
the Trial Board, while one new count
was added.
-Four charges were dismissed by
the board before the trial began
because they dealt with incidents
which were said to have occurred
before Chief Murphy took over as
head of the Fire Department. Later,
a charge that the chief had been
disorderly in Chinatown restau-
rant was dismissed for lack of EVIL
dence to support it.
Fire Department members testi-
fed in large numbers at the trial, |