OCR Text |
Show PERRAULT CASE HEARD. One Witness Makes Important Admission, Ad-mission, Showing Department Ordered His Iteinoval. Tntni'Mi srrciAt.i llolse. lln April - -When testlfs-Ing testlfs-Ing tolas before Inspertnr Greene in Iho Pertaiilt ease, llohert MeCincken tho fnimei emptoso of tho ollke who hid been Instrumental In having all these Otalgia pushed said he signed the oath requited when nil itnplovo Is transrciied fiom one pay-ioll to nn-nlliei nn-nlliei but .11 not know what it meant He minuted iieelvlng n letter tioin Penault liotltslng Mm the department had authorlxid his transter and le-quesllua; le-quesllua; Mm tn renppcir foi elms ln-Btend ln-Btend or doing so, he write densliiR the light ot the ilepirlnient to trunsrer him This Ii stlmonv Is Important because one or thi" original charges wiib that l'u mult had le-noved him lu violation of law witeieaa lie was lemoved b) the dcpai uncut nftet he had leriisul to wink under the trnnsrci .McCrackcn aw ore Unit Chlcr Clerk ltobb look him into his private" loom on authority or the Hurveyor General nnd ilematuled a campaign contribution contribu-tion He sild Chler Draughtsman Tor-shas Tor-shas had notlflol tho clerks tiles would all hnve to contrlbut" lln also said ho saw 1'iirshas hand Perrault n sum of uioues collected fiom the clerks. John D Hell, now n ilrutightsmnn In the olllce, Biid he hid paid ltobb (10, foi which he lecclvcd u receipt from G L Hhoup Ho suld an nllldavlt he hud in ido lint Penault had not collected col-lected money fiom lilm was false His explanation was that Ilobh acted for Perrault Ho alsn testllled that work for private parties had been done by him nnd others during olllce hours These two witnesses will bo cross-examined Mnndns, |