120 Years Ago, 1906 transcribed as originally published in the Youngstown Vindicator:

“Moyer adjudged guilty; discharged from force. Mayor Baldwin rendered his decision without hesitancy. Exception filed. Detective’s discharge becomes effective at once….”

“‘Mr. Moyer, after listening to this long and tedious case, I find from the evidence in the case, and I feel that I have jurisdiction under Article 9, section 2, for conduct unbecoming an officer.

“‘That the said George Moyer, in the month of February, 1906, the exact date complainant is unable to state, called upon one Mrs. Fannie Swadener at her residence in East Wood Street in said city of Youngstown, and thereupon the said Moyer inquired of her what kind of a place she was running and he was informed that she was keeping a rooming house, whereupon Moyer said that there wasn’t much money in the rooming business and advised said Mrs. Swadener to start a house of prostitution, whereupon Mrs. Swadener refused to have anything further to do with him.’ Under that section and under section 10:

“‘That at No. 41 West Woodland Avenue, about two and a half months ago, there resided a girl by the name of Gertrude Babbett, and that at said time said George Moyer went to said house, and made an assault on said Miss Babbett; that after a desperate struggle with said Moyer said Miss Babbett succeeded in breaking away from said Moyer and escaping; that said Moyer in said struggle tore a large amount of clothing from the person of said Miss Babbett.’

“‘I find from the evidence that those charges are sustained and from the present time you are discharged from the service of the city.’

“Those are the words with which Mayor Frank L. Baldwin concluded the Moyer investigation and informed Detective George B. Moyer that he had been found guilty of the charges brought by William Thomas, afterward repudiated by him and then signed by Mrs. Fannie Swadener and Mrs. Speer….

“This is one of the most spectacular cases that ever involved the official family of Youngstown. From the beginning it was filled with affidavits against Moyer, affidavits that the former affidavits were untrue and no end of insinuations, threats and various other kinds of hot air.

“Throughout the progress of the trial the wordy battles between attorneys were featured. On diverse occasions the opposing attorneys paid their respects to each other and to the witnesses. Throughout the trial the attorneys for Moyer attempted to show by evidence and insinuation that D.F. Anderson was backing the prosecution with his talents as an attorney and his political influence, and Mr. Anderson just as energetically endeavored to combat that theory.

“At times the incidents were dramatic. On one occasion when Attorney Moore thought Attorney Anderson had called him a liar he advanced on his opponent and threatened to do him bodily harm. He was restrained by Moyer who descended from the witness stand for that purpose.

“The last charges were filed February 26. In all, six days were used for taking testimony and making arguments, and on just as many occasions that trial was postponed.

“The final objection raised by the defense was that Mayor Baldwin had no jurisdiction on the ground that preliminary steps were not taken by submitting the charges to the chief of police and asking him to suspend Moyer. This the mayor held was not well taken. At the conclusion of the case Attorney S.S. Conroy, for Moyer, requested the court to note an exception, which was done.”

• Compiled by Dante Bernard, museum educator at the Mahoning Valley Historical Society