Fifty Years a Detective: 35 Real Detective Stories. Thomas Furlong
A. Mr. Furlong gave me the check and instructed me to present it at the bank, as I did, and told me that he would be at the bank when I presented it.
Q. Was Mr. Furlong there? A. Yes, he came into the bank while I was at the teller's window. That was when Mr. Warner, as I believe the teller's name is, told him to arrest me.
Q. Then you do not know whether the check was a forgery or not? A. No, sir. I was only obeying the instructions of my employer, Mr. Furlong. I guess he can tell you all about that check.
The court room was crowded, and as soon as Dingfelter stated that he was a detective one of the city detectives rushed out of the court, pellmell, to the office of the Chief of Police, which was in the opposite end of the building, and informed the Chief of what had occurred. The Chief rushed into the court room, and from that time on consternation seemed to prevail among all the authorities around the Four Courts building.
Dingfelter was kept upon the witness stand for about two days, and during his entire direct testimony, nearly every question asked him by the prosecuting attorney was objected to by the attorneys for the defense. After McCulloch, as I will call him by his right name hereafter, had been excused from the witness stand, I was called. After being duly sworn and the preliminary questions asked, I was told, by the prosecuting attorney, to state to the court and jury how I had been approached by Mr. Clover and himself, and what I had done in connection with the case. I gave a detailed account of my work from the start up to that moment, being interrupted occasionally by an objection from the defendant's counsel. When I had finished my direct testimony, all of which has already been related, the counsel for the defense began to cross-examine me. My cross-examination consumed nearly a day and a half.
The defendant's counsel first wanted to know how long I had been in the detective business. I answered that I had first become engaged in the business in September, 1862. The attorney said, "Then you have had a great deal of experience?" I answered that I had, and then he said, "Where did you get this check?" exhibiting the check in question. I asked permission to examine the check, which was granted by the court, and after looking at it carefully I answered, "This is one of the blank checks that I took from Dr. Smith's office in the manner already described."
Question: Then you stole this check from Dr. Smith's office? A. I took that blank check from Dr. Smith's office without his knowledge or consent.
Q. Who filled out this check and signed Dr. Smith's name to it? A. That check was filled out by one of my employes. I stood alongside of him while he filled it out. He did it under my instructions, and if he had refused to do it I would have discharged him and he knew it; and if the law has been violated in any way I am responsible for it.
The attorney for the defense insisted that I give the name of the person who filled out the check, but the court overruled the question on the ground that I had assumed the responsibility. The counsel for the defense then said, "You know that you were violating the law by having this check made out as you did, did you not?"
I replied, "Under certain conditions, it might have been a violation of the law."
Counsel for the defense asked, "You know that it was a forgery and forgery is a crime under the law?" My answer was the same as before, that it would have been forgery under certain conditions. But he insisted on me answering him direct "yes" or "no." At this Prosecuting Attorney McDonald appealed to the court, stating that the witness could not answer the question with a direct "yes" or "no" unless permitted to explain what the certain conditions referred to were. The court permitted me to explain under what conditions the making of the check would not be considered forgery. To which I replied that inasmuch as that intent is the essence of crime, and that as there was no intent to obtain money or other valuables by means of this check on my part, who was responsible for the making of it, and that I was at the bank on the morning that McCulloch presented the check for the purpose of preventing the teller from cashing the check, if he, perchance, had not noticed that the signature of Dr. Smith was not genuine, and for the further reason that I had promptly apprehended the man who had presented the check at the bank for having done so. This was all a matter of court record.
Here I wish to say that almost every person in the courtroom, after hearing my testimony as to my obtaining the blank checks and causing one to be filled out and presented at the bank, were of the opinion that I had gotten myself into serious trouble. Many clung to that opinion until they heard my explanation, and the competent court attorneys saw at a glance that I was safe when I explained that intent was what constituted a crime.
I have been asked many, many times since the arrest of McCulloch and my tussle with him, why I caused him to knock me down and to strip the policeman and myself, leaving us in almost a nude condition, and which compelled me to go around several days with my right eye and one side of my face discolored—as some of them said, "in mourning"—and my answer has always been that I had decided everything I did in connection with the case was absolutely necessary so that I might obtain the true facts of the case, which were very essential for the proper prosecution of the perpetrator of this heinous crime, as he was the only living person who knew the real facts. I knew that Maxwell was enjoying the notoriety the newspapers were giving him, and I also knew that the public was growing tired of reading about him, and, therefore, believed that if I could paint my operative as a more desperate criminal for the time being, by the notoriety he would obtain through the papers, it would have the effect of attracting Maxwell's attention to him, so that he might bask in the light that was being attracted to McCulloch. And, as it turned out, my predictions proved true. I deemed it necessary to have McCulloch slug me and make the fight that he did with the police officer and myself in order to allay any suspicion that might arise in the mind of the Chief of Police or any of his men. The Chief was an alert and experienced officer, and if he suspected for a moment that McCulloch was not what he represented himself to be, or that he was connected with me, he would have undoubtedly exposed our scheme, and thereby destroyed our efforts, which were for the honest purpose of serving the ends of justice.
Both McCulloch and myself were acting parts, and from the result it seems that the parts were acted well. I could have gotten the blank check from Dr. Smith, I have no doubt, merely by asking for it, but he, of course would have wanted an explanation from me, and if I had explained why I wanted them he would have been obliged to state the facts on the witness stand when called before the Grand Jury, and this would have been fatal to my scheme. Had I told my operative Phillips, who lodged the first complaint against McCulloch, or Dingfelter, as he called himself, he would have been compelled, under oath, to have stated the truth. This, too, would have been fatal. My keeping the matter a secret, resulted in every person telling the truth, or what they believed to be the truth. I myself, did not appear either at police headquarters or at the preliminary hearing, nor before the Grand Jury, and was not called upon to testify until Maxwell was on trial.
Marshall F. McDonald was sitting in his office one day alone, about a month after Dingfelter had been in jail and had made such good progress with Maxwell, when William Marion Reedy, better known then as Billy Reedy, entered his office. Reedy was, at that time, a reporter for the Globe-Democrat, and was very popular. He knew every official around the Four Courts and in fact, every man in St. Louis who was worth knowing. He was a warm friend and great admirer of Mr. McDonald, and on entering his office and noting that he was alone, he said, "Mac, why don't you select the right kind of a fellow and have him locked up in Jail with Maxwell. He might succeed in getting the facts as to Preller's murder from him."
Mr. McDonald was startled to hear this suggestion from Mr. Reedy, but, being a man of steady nerves, he managed to conceal his surprise. He told Reedy that he did not believe that anything could be accomplished by locking a man up in jail for that purpose. "For," said Mac, "there are nearly four hundred prisoners in that jail and a man might be there for months before he could get to Maxwell, and then it is quite likely that his attorneys have already advised him not to talk to any person about his case."
Reedy said, "It occurred to me that it might be a good thing to do, and I therefore made the suggestion to you for what it is worth, but, as you do not think it worth while to try it, just let it go."
He left the office, and just as soon as McDonald could don his hat and coat and leave his office unobserved, he hastened to