Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

DISPENSAR COMMITTEE CONCLUDES ITS WORK DRASTIC ACTION RECOMMEND ED TO LEGISLATURE. Newberry Matters Not Taken Up Mr. E. Y. Morris On the Wit ness Stand. The dispensary investigating com mittee reported to the general assem bly on Thursday night, recommending drastic action toward the Carolina Glass company. It recommended that in view of the revelations that had been made that the state take steps to rescind the orders the dis pensary has ahead with the company. amounting to -300 cars, worth about $700,000, and call for bids for such bottles as may be needed. says the Columbia State. Following is a copy of the commit tee's report: To the General Assembly of South Carolina: The committee appointed to inves tigate the dispensary, respectfully re ports to the general assembly: That in the course of their investi gation they find that the contracts be tween the Carolina Glass company and the dispensary are in a very un satisfactory condition; that higher glass as may be needed, -s Is now pro than the agreements call for; that there has been a lack of competi tion in bidding; that glass has been sol{ to the dispensary without writ ten cofftracts, with said company for about 300 cars of glass, an unreason able and excessive quantity, the con tracts for which, as your commit ze believes, have been awarded at an excessive price. Therefore, your committee recom mends that expert accountants and such other persons as may be neces sary be employed to check up all ac counts, inspect the contracts of the Carolina Glass company with the dis pensary and that the legislature take such action as may be necessary to rescind all unfilled contracts or or ders awarded to the said Carolina Glass company; that the bids be re opened anid the contracts for glass awarded to the lowest responsible bidder and that the bidding on such glass as may be needed, as in now pro vided by law for the purchase of li quors. Your committee recommends, the passage of the concurrent resolution submitted herewith. - J. T. Hay. Chairman. The dispensary investigation was concluded somewhat abruptly Thurs day afternoon when the committee to go into the "Newberry matters,'' although Mr. Lyon and Mr. Chris tensen were anxious to do so. The Carolina Glass company 's transac tions were investigated to the fliale and the committee adjourned to meet at the call of Chairman Hay. When the committee first conven ed Mr. Fraser made a motion that the committee do not sit any more during the sessions of the house and senate. He gave very logical reasons. Im portant reports from the committee on free conference are being brought in and every member might be need ed. Mr. Lyon stated that he would vote in opposition to the resolution. Mr. Christensen also favored pushing the investigation right along. The legis lators want information. Col. Spivey thought the first duty was in the house and senate, but if a majority could be obtained for the committee meetings, the members mnight go on with the investigation. It was so decided. Mr. C. H. Norton, manager of the Carolina Glass company, was again put on the stand. He stated that the basis of their calenlations had been 850 cars. They had delivered 410,045 eases. Mr. Norton's statement show ed that numerically 457 cars had been delivered. At the rate of 850 cases to a car it figured out that 482 cars of bottles at that basis. The 34 cars of flasks for case goods would not cover this discrepancy. Mr. Lyles called attention of witness to fact that the contract put no limitation on the number of cases to a car. A letter was put in evidence by Mr. Lyon showing estimates made by Mr. G. H. Charles for the number of flas for the lower grades of case goods which the dispensary started to bot tling last year. These amounted to 40 ears. They are being paid $3.40 for halves; $4.85 for pints, and $8.65 for quarts for these flasks. Mr. Lyon inquired if there was ever any award for 34 cars of glass for these bottles except Mr. Charles' let ter to Mr. Seibles. Witness answered if there had ever been any contract he had never seen it. They had figured on 1,000 cases to the car for new bottles. Did not know why the diserepancy. Witness .;i1ted that if these bottles had been mih t prices e.isting whenl order wa;s n.- lvddY wouild have been nOwh t-trato '.) ventsz a .--ross lllw er1 10n pi zma d ha,1f p)i!ts- and11 .1 cents on quarts. Mr. Norton explained that this was his mistake. They had been ship ping at prices named and had just run out this lot at the same figures. the prices4" 1Well, I just did it.'" Mr. Lyon went over the figures again and again. Mr. Norton declared that there had been no intention to get more than was right for these new flasks, but he had wanted to put them in with the shipment of other glass at the same tine in order to expedite the matter. Witness said he considered it a part of the order of March, 1904, and he had tried to ship the new bottles out on that contract in order to get the shipment in early. The March, 1904, prices showed high water mark. Two contracts at decreasing priees had been received between that time and the time of re ceiving the order for the glass for the new bottles, but he was working un der the coitract of March, 1904. Mr. Lyon then searched the witness vigorously to bring it out that there was no standard for the number of cases in a car or if there had been a standard they had had contracts for 400 cars and had delivered 487. Even the 34 ears of new style bottles sand wiched in there would not make up the difference. This showed a differ ence of 48 cars which were delivered over and above the 400 contracted for. After having secured the 48 cars admitted to have been delivered, 1r. Lyon then began calculation *to show that these cars had been at an exces sive price. Witness admitted that it appears so. The difference in prices was about 13 to 20 cents per gross. Mr. Lyles called attention to the fact that demijohns had been deliver ed out of the 48 cars. Mr. Lyon asked witness' attention to fact that these calculations were based on number of cases delivered, and not the same calculations as those made the afternoon before. Both cal culations footed up the same thing when the demijohns were taken out of the 457 cars delivered numerically and the 48 cars were added, each cal ulation footing up 482 cars. On a basis of 82 cars, Mr. Lyon had Mr. Norton to make calculations to show that there is a difference of $1, 742.50 in the prices. Admitted Overcharge of $1,750. Mr. Norton said that certainly it is due to the dispensary to return that amount and that it could be done:; they have never had a settlement with the dispensary for $5,000 at a time and had never had a final set tlement on any contracts. The matter was just running along. Witness admitted that it would look suspicious that there should be a drop in prices just at the time Mr'. Packham had come here. Witness de nied, however, that there is any signi ficance. Mr. Norton was asked a number of questions through Mr. G. H. Charles' letter to Mr. Seibels. Witness stated he had considered it an amendment t.o the order under contract of December, 1904. Mr. Gaston wanted to know why the bookkeeper had not kept tab of. when one contract ended and another began. Witness replied that any book keeper may make mistakes and that in final settlement he, Mr. Norton, will have this whole matter checked up and proper credits made. Mr. Lyon presented a letter to show that Mr. Seibels had advised Mr. Norton in regard to the contracts with the dispensary. Mr. Lyon called attention to the Ifact that there were orders for 20 cars of of demijohns and that 22 cars had been shipped. Witness said that the dispensary reserves the right to in rease its orders. There are 10,000 Idemijohns reckoned to a car. The price is 24 cents each. They do not pack a car full of demijohns. They had shipped something like 16,981 demijohns more than contracts called for. These two additional cars had been shipped in last six months. Mr. Lyon then put in evidence bid of C. L. Flaccus company for demi johns at '20 cents each, 4 cents lower 'than Carolina, on date of March 4, 1905. The difference was $624.95 on the two extra cars. At 3 cents the dif ference would have been $594. Mr. Lyon showed that the glass company had bid 23 cents when Flaceus bid 20, but that the demijohrns had been delivered at 24 cents. Witness said there is a difference in demijohns. Mr. Lyon put in evidence two demi johns, one made hy the Carolina Glass company, which the witness (said was not so good as the other as to covering. The identity of the other packag"e was not explained andf V'et ifenla InsI a nistt'PV. Mr. fli ten Nided to kIIIwwy tlie --lass cwmpany clbing-ed 24 (-ents instead of 23 in accrdance with the bid. Witness said he had not found out until he came here that there had been an excess of two cars of the ord er at 24 cents. Mr. Lyon asked why 'Flaccus had not put in a bid on flasks if he coulId submit a lower bid on demijolins. Witness said he didn't know anything about the Flaccus bids. In regard to sl-ipments of empty cases in cars, previously referred to, I Mr. Lyon asked who paid the freight. The glass factory paid it and charged it to the State dispensary. Mr. Lyon asked concerning other speefic shipments of empty cases and charges for freight and trackage, one amounting to $420 and another to $33S Mr. Norton said the dispensary paid the freight. Mr. Lyon said he 'again desired to ask Mr. Norton who are the officers of the glass company and the salary of each.. Mr. Lyles objected, saying they did not object to the names of the offi cers being given. Mr. Lyon said the private affairs of Mr. Packham had been gone into and this was also a legitimate inquiry. Mr. Lyles argued thatthe statement of -Mr. Lyon was unfair, Packham: uwas a witness and they had a right to attack his credibility. Mr. Lyon had put up Mr. Norton, who was Mr. Lyon's witness, and he could not therfore attack his credibility. The matter, Mr. Lyles said, was not relevant. Mr. Lyon said that Mr., Lyles had misconstrued the purpose of the in quiry and he held that the committee was not bound by the rules of evid ence, as is a eourt. He asked the question, and would accept Mr. Nor ton's statement, so far as he knew. Mr. F. H. Weston, who has been as sociated with Mr. Lyles as counsel for the Carolina Glass company, also argued that the point was irrelevant and was going needlessly into the pri vate affairs of citizens. Mr. Gaston for the committee, after consultation, held that the names of the officers could be disclosea and if the officers are not connected with the State the amount of the salaries is not pertinent. Mr. Norton stated, when permitted, that Mr. Rozier, the bookkeeper, Mr.' Williams, Mr. Norton and Mr. Seibles are the officers. He explained the duties of each. In response to questions from Mr. Welsh, witness stated there was a 100-car order in March and a 100-car order in December. He was asked why the order f'?r b4 cars of 1,000 cases were made in February, 1905. Mr. Norton stated that these were for a different kind of glass and the board would not meet for some time to award contracts. As to the demijohns. witness said that there was an order for 10 cars in February, 1904; there were 10 cars in 1903. All of these dates were before: Messrs. Boykin and Towill went on the b)oard in March, 1904. It was: March, 1905, when Flaccus put in a lower bid on demijohns. Glass corn pany then bid 23 cents. In December, 1904, witness bid 24 cents. Witness~ did not know that Flaccus was bid dinoz' Mr. Lyon offered a carbon copy of a bid of the Carolina Glass company with the bid of Flaccus written in parallel coluwn. Witness said that he! had nothing to do with the matter. Witness claimed that his demijohn~ is more serviceable than the other ex hibited. It is heaver and is made of flint glass while the other is of green glass, though the bottom is better. Mr. Lyles then examined the wit ness, who read a letter from Mr. Seibles in which he quoted the number Iof eases needed by the dispensary in making the new bottles. Mr. Seibles had stated in that letter that it would cost very much more to make the change, but the glass company wanted the business and wanted to do it in Istrict accordance with the law. Mr. Lyles called attention to the annotations made on the paper ex hibited by Mr. Lyon. Witness said he 'had not seen those annotations until he saw the paper in the committee room. Mr. Lyon demanded to know if the inference was intended that the com mittee had put the figures there. Mr. Lyles said that no such dis courtesy was intended. Mr. E. K. Ward was next sworn. He has charge of the Bombay reed de partment of the Carolina Glass com pany. Mr. Lyles asked if witness un derstood that to swear falsely was perjury. Witness colored up and re plied that he did. Mr. Ward then admitted that he had offered expenses to Aaron Clark! of Statesville to come down here to I swear agaMinst raeklam. la rk had stated. that :Ie had nitt the fa-e to comie dow!1 ireI t1 te-Lif y a ai.nst lc;ki nn illllinll'h ( sltii atcl ei v tw 'plhine that he h:.dl ha a conVer. Stin With Packhniii at lie hotel iii Salislrly on th :ird ,.I f Februialy. Mr. Lvles and question not pressed now is if he is not in Baltimore. Wit ness replied that Mr. Seibels is here in Columbia.. Mr. Lyon wanted to know if Mr. Charle.s.clerk of the-State dispensary, has not been wiring Lana han in Baltimore to get information as to Mr. Packhain. Witness knew nothing about Mr. Charles. Mr. Packhan was put up and was; asked if Aaron Clark had not stated to him that what Ward had said was a malicious lie. (Objection made by Mr. Lvles and questioned not pressedI as Mr. Ward had not been permitted to give hearsay.) Mr. Weston challenged the sub committee to go to Salisbury. Mr. Gaston stated that the com mittee is accepting no challenges. They want to get facts. Mr. Packham stated that Clarke would coine at his own expense and tell the truth. Mr. Lyon then put Mr. Ward back on the stand and it was agreed for him to give hearsay. In reply to Mr. Lyles' question, Mr. Ward stated that he was in Salisbury February 3rd. He was in Clarke's office. Aaron Clark said: "Be the way, Ward, there is a glass man in town, a friend of yours, George Packham. He is going to Columbia to expose a lot of rot-, tenness." Clarke said that Pack-! ham had come in response to a tele- i gram from the committee. Clarke said that Packham would show up a lot of rottenness and would hurt Car olina Glass company and might put.1 them out of business. Later Mr. I Ward was in J. C. Somers' place in Salisbury and Mr. Maxwell, the bookkeeper, had said that Packham had told him a lot of ipformation in regard to the glass tompany, that they were charging $ for bottles which he had offered to niake for $6. Mr. Lyon cross-examined the 'Wit ness. Mr. Ward, after repeating the conversation with Clarke the third time, stated that Clarke had said that Packham had "said'' he would put the Carolina Glass comp)any out of business. On two former statements Mr. Ward had said that Clarke had made the statement that Packham was corn ing down to put the'- Carolina Glass company out of business. The third time he recdlled that Clarke gave the information as coming from Pack ham. Mr. Ward said that he hadl seen the telegrams from Maxwell and Clarke. He had recited this whole inident to Clarke over the 'phone night before last. Mr. Seibels had cut in on the 'phone and had heard1 the entire conversation with Mr. Clarke. Mr. Ward was examined by Mr. Weston. Said he was agent of the Southern railway company before ac cepting the piosition with the glass company. Had held several responsi ble positions. Packham's Defence. In the afternoon the investigation was opened w-ith Mr. Packham on the stand. He presented a telegram from Aaron Clarke of Salisbury telling Packham to call him over the long1 distance 'phone Wednesday night. Packham had called at that hour. Clarke had then said to witness that1 if he came to Columbia his testimony would do the Carolina Glass company no good that Mr. Ward had taken ad vantage of a few remarks Clarke had made and that if Mr. Ward insisted that Clarke had said that Packham had said thus and so it was "damn, malicious lie.'' Witness claimed that there was a conspiracy to defame his character and presented a letter he had just re ceived from Packham Bros., in which it was stated that Robert Lanahan 's "young man'' had 'phoned to them asking if there was an Edward Pack ham. Lanahan 's clerk had said that they had a wire from South Carolina to find out if Ed Packhiam was in town. Lanahan 's man stated that it was from a friend of E. Packham Mr. Charles. This young man in quired if "all troubles'' had been set tled between the Paekham. Lanahan 's young man also wanted to know if Harry P. Hoffman was in Baltimore. Mr. Lyles then began to cross-ex amine Mr. Packham. Witness said that his bids were dictated in his of fice and were typewritten. Packham uses a yellow paper. M. Lyon asked many questions to, find out the kind of paper used by Packham in writing to Mr. D)outhit in 1902. Mr. P'ackham denied again that he had saidl that he was down here to wreck the Carolina Glass company. Mr. Lyles asked if he had niot said that he was down here 'to put the harpoon into those who had done him wron a he woul put it in deep," HAIR & NEW Q Received Every day f week we hav buying public for their dolIai We intend mab business bigger ti promise you Ne Goods at Right P Your Trade and will toscome to our Stor HAIR & I W HY GET 1'l TheRightDi Satisfaction Guar Can you get rr any where e Can you g< Everywhei GILDER & Are'You Planning Many persons are occup making plans and specifie homes. it has often been said th~ building experiences before the idea Let Us Plan You ad cllwthorcaaoge - ensim n wuda es o f ~ nal Waeds FOR SAL] 0. C. DAVIS, New NAVIND OODS, Right. or the past e given the more value r. :ing the spring hian ever. We w and Stylish rice. We Want Make it Pay You IAVIRD NOT 'AT rug Store? anteed! sore Ise? at as much -e Else. WEEKS. a New Home? 4 'ed at this season in tions for their new. t a person must have seeral I home is constructed. r Plumbing? If you will allow us to plantheplumb- * ing of your home, we willmake it r'ght the first time. We ao no experimentmig S but execute all con tracts on the most approved sanitary lines -.emplgy the most experienced [ and competent me-k chanics and use the very best fix:ures - made - namely "Shada,d" Porce lain Enameled Baths. .and One-piece Lavatories. If you do not find it convenient to call mn person, write or : phone us and we id other literature on the subject* vise, however, th2z vou inspect I2 layd in our showroom. Ask ' ig" ?ree uponI requs . E BY berry, S. C.