Bowery Murder, page 17
CONFERENCE APPARENTLY ARRANGED
Testimony of an elevator operator checked the clerk’s statement. The former remembered two women who had got off at the tenth floor yesterday. They were not guests of the hotel and, instructed to note all such persons, he had reported their presence to the clerk who had seen them come in. They arrived separately, about fifteen minutes apart. They were in Rose O’Neil’s apartment together but left alone, about five minutes elapsing between their departures.
WHY DID THEY VISIT ROSE?
Assuming the identification is certain, the question arises as to the nature of the conference and the bearing it had upon Rose’s confession made a few hours later. Inquiry at police headquarters brought no answer to this query nor was much interest shown in the disclosure. Acting Inspector Dan Carr, who has charge of the case, said:
“That news is not surprising. Do a little more investigating and you’ll probably find that District Attorney McDermott was there too.”
POLICE DO NOT EXPLAIN
Inspector Carr would not explain this remark but admitted that he had questioned hotel employees concerning Miss O’Neil’s visitors and had learned of the two women.
The clerk is Freddy Lovering, living at 137 Maple Street, Manhattan, and he is employed only during the day. He stated that he had been quizzed by the police with others of the hotel staff.
CHAPTER VIII
From the Daily Tabloid (New York), Early Afternoon Edition, Friday, April 27, 1928
ROSE’S CONFESSION FALSE!
Gordon and O’Neil Say She Did Not Kill Woodward
Rose O’Neil, the Belle of the Bowery, deliberately lied when she confessed last night to Police Commissioner Howard that she killed Thomas Woodward, according to the emphatic denials of her statements by two who were present at the murder.
Watts Gordon, confessed killer, stated from the Tombs early this morning that her confession was absolutely false. Her father, Peter O’Neil, Bowery leader, was more emphatic in denying that his daughter had shot Woodward. “She is crazy!” says he.
Who is right? Is Rose trying to shield Gordon?
The police commissioner believes her story. The district attorney discredits it. The latter stated to-day to the Daily Tabloid:
“Miss O’Neil did not shoot Woodward. Of that I am convinced. Her story is simply one to draw a false herring across a trail that leads directly to Watts Gordon. She is trying to protect this man who is in love with her. I will pay no attention to the confession.”
GORDON GIVES FIRST INTERVIEW
Watts Gordon broke his ten-day silence this morning and requested that reporters be given access to him. Tombs officials granted this request. He received the representatives of the press in the head keeper’s office. His manner was earnest, and after a few personal greetings he gave out the following statement:
“Miss O’Neil’s confession is almost a pure fabrication. I cannot understand why she made it. There is only one bit of truth in what has been given to me as her official statement. Woodward did pursue her and made himself very obnoxious. She did not kill him, however. I have confessed to that. The whole affair has evidently upset her to such a degree that she has decided to take the blame. It is a noble gesture which I cannot permit. She is absolutely guiltless in the matter. I swear to this before God.”
REFUSES TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
A rapid-fire barrage of questions was addressed to him, but Gordon waved them all aside. “I cannot give you boys more than that. If the police hold Miss O’Neil they are holding the wrong person. I shot Woodward. No woman is directly concerned with his death. Miss Williams and Miss Carroll may have been there that night, but neither of them killed Woodward, who deserved what he got. I would do it again in the same circumstances. That’s all.”
He then requested the keepers to take him back to his cell, and the interview ended.
PETER O’NEIL EMPHATIC
Rose O’Neil’s father also for the first time consented to see reporters when they flocked to the Bowery Bar. He appeared almost immediately and was in an apparently angry mood.
“I am not responsible for my daughter. This story she told to the police commissioner last night is absolutely apple sauce. She had nothing to do with killing Tom Woodward. Gordon shot him, as he has confessed. If the police commissioner is dumb enough to believe her story he also ought to be tried for his sanity. I feel like having my girl up before a lunacy commission after reading what she confessed.
“Tom Woodward was a gentleman. He never pulled those lines in front of me that Rose says he did. Gordon shot him on account of an argument over a cock-and-bull story about a million dollars’ worth of graft I was supposed to get.
DENIES GRAFT
“Do I look like I had cleaned up a quarter of a million out of United Omnibus? I’d be down in Florida or out on a yacht if I had. The Post is trying to get an investigation. Maybe they will and maybe they won’t, but they won’t hang me on their fake evidence, dug up by Gordon, about United Omnibus. Sure I had some of the stock. Who didn’t? Woodward told me to buy it like he told a lot of friends. But I got out in time. That was the difference between me and some of the soreheads that have been running him down.”
HAS NOT SEEN ROSE
O’Neil was asked if his daughter had consulted him about her confession.
“I haven’t seen her for over a week. I didn’t know where she was, and I don’t know why she left me. She’s all that I got now, and her attitude in this matter has been an awful wallop.”
Concerning the murder itself O’Neil repeated much that has already been given out by the police. He had nothing new except the statement that the noise of an automobile parked outside and the passing of a heavy truck effectively drowned the noise of the shots and prevented anyone on the sidewalk from hearing them. Relative to the presence of Irene and Lila at the bar, he stated that they must have been there if they said so, but that he would only give testimony on that subject in court.
HOWARD ATTACKS McDERMOTT
“If the district attorney will not ask for an indictment against Miss O’Neil,” Commissioner Howard stated late this morning, “an indictment will be had through one of his assistants. The prosecution of crime cannot be stopped in this great city simply because the elected public prosecutor feels that he must protect his own interests.”
District Attorney McDermott termed this attack by the police commissioner as “just political bunk to get the nomination for mayor.”
ROSE STILL IN CELL
Rose O’Neil occupied a cell in Jefferson Market jail this morning. Breakfast was sent in to her, and she was visited by her maid, who brought a suitcase full of feminine necessities. It was stated by those in charge that she had especially requested that no one be permitted to visit her except former Lieutenant Governor Portor of Pennsylvania, who is her counsel. All attempts of the press to visit her were denied.
From the Graphoid, Saturday, April 28, 1928
WOODWARD CASE PROVES LOVE STRONGER THAN LIFE
Rose and Gordon Each Want to Absolve Other
By Ruth Millard
Springing up from all the muck and sordidness of the Woodward murder, blooms a lovely lily—the love of Rose O’Neil and Watts Gordon—a love which will go down as one of the great affections of history.
It is stronger than the love of life itself. Each of these two young people—straightforward, clean-living youth—has deliberately stepped into the valley of the shadow of death in an attempt to shield the other from the penalty which the law demands of those who kill.
The fate of a guilty murderer is the electric chair. Yet Watts and Rose are each willing to risk the chance of being condemned to die by that horrible method in order to absolve the other from the onus of killing Woodward.
CONTRAST TO SNYDER CASE
What a contrast their pure, sincere passion is to that of the two principals in the famous Queens County case, where each sought to blame the other for the murder of a husband who stood in the way. The difference is found in the fact that between Rose and Watts is a real, true love, not an illicit, sordid companionship.
Is Watts guilty?
He has made confession which Rose says was deliberately concocted in order to shield her.
IS ROSE GUILTY?
Is Rose guilty? Watts claims he killed Woodward and that she has made a false confession. He modestly does not say that she is taking the guilt upon herself in order to shield him. He simply states that he cannot understand it. That is the true lover. He wishes to spare his beloved the embarrassment of a public avowal of her love.
WHO SHOT WOODWARD?
Both cannot be guilty. One of the two fired the fatal shot that deservedly put Woodward out of this world. Was it Rose or was it Gordon? They know the truth, although on second thought it can be asked, DO THEY KNOW THE TRUTH?
Can such a thing be possible that each sincerely and truly believes that the other is alone guilty? Such a question hardly seems credible, and the enigma of the confessions must be laid to the endeavour of each to shield the other.
DELIBERATE CONFESSIONS
Neither confession has been a passionate outpouring of hysterical phrases, such as might be the case in a sudden tearing apart of a wife and husband by the police making an arrest. In such cases it happens occasionally that the innocent party tries to take the blame only to recant later. Here the confessions have been made deliberately and after long thought.
Unquestionably both have weighed the possibilities that will ensue from an avowal of guilt, arrest, confinement, trial, and punishment. But this sacrifice has not been deemed too great.
Rose and Watts, after due consideration, have been willing to risk all.
Such a sacrifice makes trangression of the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” seem less of a trespass in the eyes of us mortals, and possibly less in the judgment of Him who gave the tables of the ten laws to the ancient peoples three thousand years ago for the world to forever obey.
From the Tabloid News, Saturday, April 28, 1928
DIXIE COPPED LILA’S SPARKLER
Ratkowsky Claims Diamond Stolen by Dixie Blake
Max Ratkowsky came across to-day with another story of how Lila Carroll’s three-hundred-thousand-dollar spotlight came into his possession. It was given to him for safe keeping by Dixie Blake, a habitué of his Chinatown establishment and a woman with a police record. She turned it over to him in front of the Bowery Bar the night Woodward was shot and asked him to keep it for her.
HIS STORY
Ratkowsky, who talks with a strong foreign accent, told the police the following story.
“Dixie, who hangs out all the time in my place, I met her that night in front of the Bowery Bar just after I closed up on account of the police. She said she had something to give me to keep for her and turned the diamond over to me. She said it was given to her by a friend for keeping and she was afraid of having it on her. She asked me to put it in my safe. When I found out afterward it belonged to Miss Carroll I did not know what to do and I put it in my clothes to try to find her. Then I was arrested.”
He was asked if it was not unusual for anyone to turn such a jewel casually over to him.
“I am honest, ask anybody. Max Ratkowsky, his name is known from Manchuria to New York as honest. My word is my bond.”
DIAMOND TURNED BACK
The stone has been returned to Miss Carroll, who to-day apologized to Miss Williams for having accused her of the theft. Miss Williams in turn has dropped her suit for $1,000,000 against Miss Carroll for criminal libel. Thus everything is friendly again between the two famous blondes. The clash that is bound to come when their testimony is given in the trial of Watts Gordon is something else again. Each has accused the other of implication in the murder of Woodward. Perhaps before the trial they will have decided that their suppositions are all wrong.
DIXIE BLAKE MISSING
Despite the fact that Dixie Blake is an important police witness in the Bowery case, she has apparently slipped away from the detectives who were watching her. After Ratkowsky’s confession, which is the third he has given concerning the sparkler, police operatives immediately sought Dixie to bring her to headquarters. They have not found her at this time. No explanation was forthcoming concerning her disappearance from either Commissioner Howard or Acting Inspector Carr, in charge of the case.
From the Morning Herald-Tribune, Saturday, April 28, 1928
BOWERY BAR SECRET DOOR EXPLAINS MYSTERY OF EXITS
Entrance Through Rear Hall, Discovered by Herald-Tribune Throws Doubt On All Testimony of Exit and Entrance Time
KNOWN ONLY TO O’NEIL’S FRIENDS
Reporter in Night Search Unearths Roundabout Way of Getting into Bar
By W. K. Smith
The police have had undisputable evidence of numerous persons entering or being in the back room of the Bowery Bar just previous to Thomas Woodward’s murder. Equally positive witnesses have testified that they did not see those who entered leave or see Watts Gordon or Rose O’Neil enter as they claimed. The discovery of a secret entrance into the rear hall of the bar explains this mystery. Last night a reporter for the Morning Herald-Tribune after considerable investigation discovered a previous unknown method of getting into O’Neil’s famous barroom.
It is a devious passage which begins in a private office on the ground floor of 39 Bayard Street, opens out into a covered court, twists through a rear hallway, and finally emerges into the Bowery Bar. A six-foot mirror in the rear hall of the bar makes the door leading to it.
FREQUENTLY USED AT NIGHT
Investigation by the Morning Herald-Tribune of occupants of the building adjoining indicates that the secret way has been used frequently at night. Positive testimony concerning those who may have entered or left through it the night of Woodward’s murder has not been possible to obtain, although one woman has a distinct remembrance of seeing two finely gowned women come out hurriedly at different times and hail taxis. She was unable to specify the exact night when this happened, but she believes it was the night of the murder.
A diagram in an adjoining column shows the secret passage in detail. Entrance is obtained on Bayard Street by entering the hallway of No. 39. This is an old three-story building, occupied by a furrier on the second floor and by a pants manufacturer on the third. The ground floor is divided into two offices, the one to the front being vacant. Inquiry reveals that it has not been occupied for several years.
In the rear facing a small back yard is the office of the Hercules Trucking Company. This office is a dingy room with a dilapidated desk and a few chairs. From it a door opens into a small enclosed court which cannot be reached by any other exit from the building. The doors, in contrast with the flimsy appearance of the furniture, are all solid oak wood with patented locks, operating crossbars.
INTO CELLARS OF THREE HOUSES
From the covered court steps lead down into the cellar of an adjoining house, and a small passageway then continues under the three houses to steps leading upward to a. second small covered court directly behind the Bowery Bar. This underground passageway was evidently made by bricking in the end of the cellars and piercing the walls between the houses. All indications show that it was built years ago.
Adjoining the Bowery Bar on the Bowery is a clothing store with small lofts above. Entrance to the lofts is obtained by steps leading up from a hall entrance on the Bowery. Under these steps is a secret hall which leads back to the small covered court in back of the Bowery Bar. Through the wall between the bar and clothing store is a door opening into the rear hall of O’Neil’s saloon. This door is hidden on the inside by a mirror.
Occupants of the clothing store did not know of the hall under the steps nor did those living in the flat houses on Bayard Street know that the ends of the cellars had been blocked in to make a passageway.
O’NEIL OWNED BUILDINGS
Peter O’Neil, owner of the bar, has at one time owned the entire block of houses along Bayard Street between Bowery and Division. Search of ownership records shows that at present he has title to all except one of the four buildings which are part of the passage. The end one, in which the trucking office is located, was sold several years ago to his political lieutenant Harry Kelly.
By means of this secret entrance persons could get into or leave the back rooms of the bar without anyone in the barroom seeing them or without anyone standing on the corner being aware of the fact.
O’NEIL DENIES USE
O’Neil, upon being questioned by Acting Inspector Carr of the Police Department, denied that the passage had been in use for a long time.
“It was put there to serve Sunday customers before Prohibition,” he said. “There used to be a law about closing the bars on Sunday, and that’s the very day a poor working man wants to get a good glass of beer. The passage was used then. Once in a while maybe it’s been used since. I was going to close it up some time ago but never got around to it. Nobody left through there the night of Woodward’s murder so far as I know. The door in back of the mirror is locked.”
However, the situation, according to O’Neil, indicates that the passageway was free and could be used. Its existence opens up startling new possibilities concerning the death of Woodward. It can account for the exits of several persons connected with the crime and can also account for the possibility of persons being present who were not seen to enter the bar that night.
HERALD-TRIBUNE REPORTER RESPONSIBLE
Through the investigating mind of a reporter on this paper the passageway was discovered. The police were then called in to force an entrance, with the result that the secret way was disclosed in its entirety.
This new development, etc., etc.
Compiler’s Note
As a matter of fact, I took upon myself too much glory for the discovery of the secret passage. I really conceived the idea that there might be some other way of getting into the bar than by the publicly known entrances, but I had no idea of just where such a doorway might be. Irene had herself suggested another entrance.
