'IT MAY BE TRUE,'
SAYS THE CHIEF
IN FACT "I'M INCLINED TO BE-
LIEVE IT IS."
CITY FULL OF VICIOUS VAGS.
SALOONKEEPER ISSUES POLICE
ORDERS FROM SALOON.
Men Who Dare Do Their Duty Are
Moved and Threatened With
Discharge -- What the
Records Prove.
Chief of Police Daniel Ahern said yesterday in reference to the charges that the city was infested to an unprecedented extent with vagrants of a certain class: "While that may be only a rumor, I am inclined to believe that it is true."
The chief denied yesterday that he knew of any of his officers being threatened or intimidated by thieves and vagrants whose only support for years has been some unfortunate woman, and also by a certain saloonkeeper politician. Yet on Saturday the chief admitted that two of his officers now working in No. 4 district in plain clothes, John Rooth and A. B. Cummings had been to see him about that very matter.
On their first visit the men were told to do their duty at all hazards. But it is said that they were sent for by the chief a couple of days later and told: "Now you may be removed the first of the month, but if you are, don't think it is because you have been arresting women of the streets in whom these vagrants are interested. I may adopt that plan of switching men about each month."
The chief was told that Lucius Downey, who had been in citizen's clothes over three years, a man against whom there was not a black mark, and J. C. Dyson, his partner in plain clothes, had been threatened repeatedly by thugs and saloonkeepers in No. 4 district, and in April were told: "We will have you both moved the first of the month." The records show that Downey and Dyson were moved May 1, as per threats, both being ordered back in uniform. Downey has a tough beat in the North End and Dyson was sent to the "tall uncut" No. 9 district. Chief Ahern was told that neither of these men would deny that they had been threatened, and that the threats were carried out.
THE CHIEF IS EVASIVE.
"In light of those threats, and the fact that both men were moved, as they were told they would be, I have been requested to ask you for your specific reasons for changing Downey and Dyson," the chief was asked by a Journal reporter.
"Lots of men are moved for their own good," the chief said.
"Were Downey and Dyson?"
"I didn't say so. Again, a man may be too long on one beat. He may become stale."
"Were these men stale?"
"No. And again complaints come in against them. Often their captain asks that they be moved."
"Were these men complained against; did the captain ask that they be moved?"
"No; oh, no."
"Then why were they moved?"
"Oh, there's lots of things that might cause the removal of a man from one beat to another."
The chief did not and would not give his reasons for removing Downey and Dyson. Neither man was told that there was a complaint against him, that he had been too long on the beat, that he was stale or anything else. They were just moved as it had been threatened by a saloonkeeper.
WHERE THEY GET ORDERS.
One of the men who is said to have threatened Rooth and Cummings is a saloonkeeper, who is now an Alderman and on the police committee in the lower house. It was he who went to No. 4 police station, asked for Rooth and Cummings, and when told that they were not in, said: "Send them up to my saloon. I want to see them." Then followed something about "seeing where they get their orders," but that was in an undertone.
The chief was asked to issue a special order which would designate a certain gang of vagrants, men who are known to the police and who would be arrested and arraigned in police court if the patrolmen knew absolutely that their chief, their captain, lieutenant and sergeants all would stand by them. The order would have been specific. Cornelius Dolan, recently appointed by the board to the office of "chief clerk to the chief," suggested that it "would not be wise," and Daniel Ahern, chief of police, let "Cornie" have his way.
"Issue a vagrancy order," he said.
AND HERE IT IS.
Then this order, simply a copy of one issued September 9, last, was issued in time for roll call last night:
SPECIAL ORDER.
Kansas City, Mo., May 5, 1908.
To Commanding Officers.
See my order of September 9, 1907, reading as follows: "Your attention is called to Chapter xxi., Article 1, defining vagrants, revised ordinance, on pages 613 and 614, Sections 1208-1209-1210-1211-1212 and 1213. You will read these sections to the officers under your command so that they will more fully understand the meaning of the sections mentioned."
Complaints have come to me that men without visible means of support are numerous, and I want you to see that this order is strictly enforced.
DANIEL AHERN,
Chief of Police
"READ EVERY DURNED SECTION."
It can readily be seen how much good this order will do when few stations have a copy of the revised city ordinances and, if they had, the chances are that the commanding officer would not go to the trouble of reading six sections to his men. At stations Nos. 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9 it was said that the order had not been received, also that if they had a copy of the ordinances they did not know it. At No. 4, the principal district referred to, it was said that the order was read, but that the copy of the ordinances was locked up. At No. 6 Lieutenant Wofford said he got the order and read "every durned section."
In an effort to better conditions, and to aid the police, Judge Kyle yesterday fined six women and two men $500 each, one man and one woman $100 each and two men and two women $50 each. All were charged with vagrancy.
"All of the women given big fines have been before me time and again for the same offense," said Judge Kyle. "I have often requested the police to bring in the men who cause these women to parade the streets at night. Little has been done toward getting the, however. If they come before me I will give them the limit if it can be proved that they frequent disreputable resorts -- even if they do work spasmodically or 'tend bar extra' for some saloonkeeper. Police have testified in my court that they were threatened."
