Fifty Years a Detective: 35 Real Detective Stories

by Thomas Furlong

"Have you any charges against him at headquarters?" I asked.

"I don't know," he replied. "All I know is that the chief sent me down here to get him and bring him to headquarters."

I said, "I do not know whether there will be any charges preferred against Erfert or not. His employer seems inclined to sympathize with him and more especially with his family. I do not believe that he cares to have him prosecuted for these thefts. I expect Erfert to call at my office some time during the forenoon, and I am looking for Mr. Bolland here at any moment. When Erfert comes I will tell him that the chief wants to see him."

The detective said, "No, you need not do that. I will wait here and when he comes I will take him up with me."

I turned to him and said slowly, "If Erfert calls at this office while you are here, and if you have a warrant for his arrest, charging him with any crime, you may take him to headquarters; but, unless you have a warrant, I will not permit you to take him out of this office. I think, perhaps, you had better go and communicate this to the chief."

This city detective and myself had been friends for a number of years prior to this occurrence, and I must say that I did not like the idea of him coming to my office and attempting to have me admit to him that I had violated the law by having unlawfully detained a citizen, thereby laying myself liable to prosecution. However, not having violated the law, I felt perfectly safe. I knew that the chief was over-anxious to make me trouble as he had made others in my line of business in the past.

The detective left my office and went to report to his chief. In the meantime Mr. Bolland came to my office and I told him of the visit of the city detective and what had been said. Mr. Bolland said that he did not care to prosecute Erfert; in fact, preferred not to do so, but, as the police had the right to prosecute the case, he was really undecided as to what was the best course to pursue.

I advised Mr. Bolland to quietly take Erfert up to police headquarters and tell the chief what he had said to me, as it occurred to me in all probability the chief would insist on having Erfert prosecuted.

Mr. Bolland accompanied Erfert to police headquarters, where the chief and the detective who had called at my office took charge of him and put him through a series of questions, which were principally concerning what Furlong had done. They tried to make him say that Furlong had arrested him and forced him to make a confession of the thefts, and Erfert afterwards told me that they never did ask him whether or not he was guilty of having robbed his employer. They bent their efforts to try and make a criminal case against me, and had gone so far as to prepare a statement, which they urged Erfert to sign, declaiming that I had violated the law, instead of Erfert, by having arrested him and then forcing him to make the statement admitting his guilt, all of which would have been a violation of the law on my part. Erfert refused to sign this statement on the ground that it was untrue. I will state right here that the foregoing is a sample of how criminal cases were handled at police headquarters about that time. However, all these efforts were in vain, as Erfert truthfully replied to every one of their questions. He told them that I had explained to him in the beginning of our interview that I had no legal right to arrest him, and that I had advised him that it was optional with him whether or not he returned the stolen goods, but that if he did not stay with me and help me that it would be my duty to turn him over to the police, and he then would be written up in the newspapers and would get a lot of undesirable notoriety that he wished to avoid.

The chief became very much exasperated with Erfert's statement, by which he could make no case against me. However, he later made a complaint himself against me, charging me with running a private detective agency without a license from the Police Board. He had a warrant issued for my arrest. I waived a hearing, and in due time my trial was called before Judge Murphy. I was placed on the witness stand and asked if I was engaged in the detective business in St. Louis. I replied that I was. I was then asked if I had a license from the Board of Police Commissioners. I answered that I had not and had never applied for one. I was then asked by what authority I was conducting my business. I stated that I was conducting my business by the authority of a charter from the State of Missouri. I was asked to produce the Articles of Incorporation. I did, and after the Judge had carefully read them and had examined my charter, he dismissed the case and assessed the cost of court on the complainant.