University of South Carolina Libraries
' 1 LABEL CASES " ? ? Tkc Shadow ( the Old Slate Dispea^ tray Frauds Laos Up A|ih. ? + SAYS THEY WERE PAID A Witness in the Trial of Iloykin, Tow ill and Tutum, Former Officials A of the Old State Dispensary, Testified That They Were All Bribed in the Isabel Matter. In the trial of W. O. Tatum, L. W. Boykin and John Bell TowiU, charged with defrauding the State in the purchase of a lot of labels for the use ^ if * rt "1 .1 r? i t?W \r It ntl If Ul nit; U1U OlillU l^lo^UJioai j II Iivu IV was in operation, John T. Earley, a liquor house representative, Thursday testified that in the Spring o<f 1905 he talked with L?. W. Boykln and J. B. Towill, dispensary directors, about the purchase of labels, suggesting that if they gave the order to -Mr. Weiskopf of Cincinnati it would mean money in Barley's pocket. That subsequently Commissioners Tatum and Boykin went to Cincinnati # In company with M. A. Goodman and Barley met them at the Grand Central depot; that together they subsequently went to the oflico of Nivisson, Weiskopf & Co. to discuss the matter of labels with them, that the agreement to give the big job of lithographing to the firm was made; that subsequently Earley received as onethird of the net profit of the deal a check for $(5,53 4; tnat uoociraan loiu him that he had paid Hoykin $3,000, Tatum $3 00, somthing to Towill, and something to W. J. McCartlia, anothei dispensary employe. Here is the substance of Parley's testimony: ^ Q. What business are you engaged in, Mr. Earley? A. At present in the wholesale liquor business. Q. Salesman for a wholesale liquor business? A. Yes, sir. Q. What liquor house do you sell for? A. The Fleishmann company. Q. Did you ever have occasion to g sell any liquor to the State dispen. sary? A. Yes, sir. Q. While you were offering these liquors for sale, aid you ever come to Columbia to see about it? A. Yes, sir. Q. Mr. Earley, state whether or not you were in the city of ColurnHnrintr t.hfl vear 1905? A. Yes. ?ir. Q. Who was on the board of directors of the dispensary at that time, * do you recall? A. I think it was John Nell To will and Whit Boykin and Hub Evans. Q. John Bell Towill, L. W. Boykin and H. H. Evans? A. Yes, sir. Q. Mr. Earley, while you were visiting Columbia during the year 1905, did you have any conversation with Mr. Towill or Mr. Boykin, or Mr. p Goodman, any of them, in reference to purchasing labels? A. Yes, sir; 1 spoke to him about it. Mr. Lyon: Well, sir, was the matter of purchasing labels discussed there? A. I told him that I had a friend who was interested on some labels, yes, sir. Q. Did you tell him who that . friend was? A. Yes, sir. ^ Q. Who was it? A. Nivisson-Weiskopf company of Cincinnati. Q. Was Mr. Goodman also interested in the order? a. Yes, sir. Mr. Lyon: Mr. Earley, were Mr. Goodman and Mr. Bowkin and your% self, were yon together at any time for the purpose of discussing this purchase of labels? A,. Yes, sfr; we spoke about it together. Q. Was Mr. Tatum present at any time that this label matter came up before you all? A. In Columbia,? Q. Well, anywhere else? A. I could not say positively whether he entered into any conversation on the label question at all. Q. Was he present when any comversatiom took place? A. I could not ^ say that positively. Q. Did you meet Mr. Tatum in Cincinnati on that occasion? A. Yes, sir. ^ T"> rxirlr f *1 n *1/1 IV,T n /IaaH- I >v itil mi', mjjfuiu uiiu Mil. uwu man? A. Yes, sir. Q. Were any labels purchased from Nivisson Welskopf company on that occasion? A. Yes, sir. i Mr. Lyon: Mr. Earley, state whether or not you had a conversation with Mr. Boykin in the city of Columbia in regard to this label transaction? A. Yes, sir. i Q. What was the conversation? A. As I repeated before, I was interested in selling labels for a friend of ] mine who- had submitted a bid to the i State dispensary, and I would have i liked to see him buy the labels. i Q. What else did jou toll Mr. Boykin? A. 1 do not remember what else I said to him. Q. State whether or not you told 1 w him that you could make some mon- 1 ey out of it? A. To the .best of my knowledge I told him that I could 1 make some money if they bought the labels from the Nivission-Weiskopf company. Q. You could make some money i out of it? A. Yes, sir. , 1 Q. Did you ever have a conversation with the board of directors? A. 1 I spoke with Mr. Towill and Mr. Boy- i kin. 1 Q. About what? A. About securing an order for labels. ] Q. Were there any bids or anything of that sort before the board or sketches or anything of that sort? A; Yes, sir; Nivisson-Weiskopf company of Cincinnati sent them a bid. Q. Mr. Earley, state whether or not it was discussed in your presence by Mr. Boykin or Mr. Towill that these sketches were sent from Nivission-Weiskopf company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Mr. Earley, state whether or not, subsequent to your conversation you had in Columbia, if Mr. Moykin and Mr. Tatum went to Cincinnati? A. Yes, sir. Q. In whose company were they when they arrived in Cincinnati? A. M. A. Goodman. . y. wnere aia you unu mem m Cincinnati? A. Goodman telegraphed me to meet him? Q. Never mind what Goodman did; where did you meet them? A. Grand Central depot. Q. From there where did you go? A. I am not pretty positive?it has been four or live years ago? Q. Did you or not go on that occasion to Nivison-Weiskopf company's place of business? A. Yes, sir. Q. For what purpose did you go there? A. They said they were going to buy bottle supplies and labels. Q. And you went to the NivisonWeiskopf company? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did Mr. Boykin go? A. Yes, sir. Q. Mr. Tatum go? A. Yes, sir. Q. And Mr. Goodman? A. Yes, sir. Q. And yourself? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you discuss the label matter going along there or during the day, at the Nivisson-Weiskopf company? A. Well we spoke about it in a general way. Q. And you were going there to make a contract for labels? A. Yes, sir. Q. Well, was there a contract entered into there? A. I do not know whether it was made there or signed there or signed here. Q. Was there any agreement or understanding about buying the labels there that day? A. Mr. Goodman told me? Q. Never mind what Mr. Goodman told you. Mr. Earley, were those sketches made in Cincinnati at the time you were discussing the matter with Wteiskopf? A. Yes, sir. Q. Mr. Earley, what proportion of the profits were you to receive? A. I was to receive one-third. Q. One-third? A. Yes, sir. Q. State whether or not that is a check you received in payment of the profit? (Handing paper to witness.) Mr Johnstone: We object now, unless these men knew it, your honor. The Court: I will let him answer that question. Mr. Lyon: Is that the check, Mr. Earley? A. Yes, sir. Col. Nelson: $G,500, is it not, Mr. Lyon? Mr. Welch: $6.&;i4. Mr. Lyon: We offer this check in evidence. Mr. Lyon: wr. Earley, you had this conversation with Mr. Goodman? A. Yes, sir. Q. What did Mr. Goodman tell you on that occasion? A. He told me a short while afterwards he paid Mr. Boykin $3,000. Mr. Raysor: I object to that, on this ground, that it was not in furtherance of this conspiracy. He said it was several months afterwards, he paid money out. Mr. Lyon: I will ask the question a little bit differently. Mr. Earley, with reference to this conversation with Mr. Goodman and yourself, when was this check of $6,5 00 and odd dollars paid you? A. It was after the labels had been shipped and paid for. Q. After the labels had been shipped and paid for that you got the check? A. Yes, sir. Q. When was this conversation had between you and Mr. Goodman; was it before you received the check? A. Which conversation do you refer to? Q. When he told you he had paid Mr. Boykin $3,000. A. It was previous to the check. Q. About how many months after they were in Cincinnati? A. Well, I do not know positively. I will say a week. Q. Within a week after they left fMnrUnnnti9 A. Yes. sir. Q. Now, Mr. Earley, you state that Mr. Goodman told you that he had paid Mr. Boykin $3,000 ? A. Yes, sir, Q. Or an amount in that neighborhood? A. Yes, lsr. Q. Did he say whether or not he paid Mr. Tatum anything? A. He said he paid Mr. Tatum $3 00. Mr. Raysor: We object to that. Mr. Lyon: Did he say whether he paid Mr. Towill anything? A. Yes, 3ir; he said ho paid him some amount; I do not know the exact amount. Mr. Timmerman: We object Mr Lyon: Did he tell you whether he paid anybody else anything or not? A. He told me he paid another party some money, a Mr. Mack. Q. Was it McCartha? A. I think 30. Q. What relation was McCartha to rowill? Mr. Timmerman: We object to that, your honor. Mr. McCartha is not indicted. Mr. Lyon: The indictment, your honor, stated that lie paid various sums to Towill, Boykin, and other persons to the jurors unknown. Q. Mr. Earley, state whether or not Mr. Goodman, at this conversation to , i y which we referred, stated that he paid Mr. McCartha some money? A. YC8, sir. Q. Do you know who Mr. McCartha is or was? A. He was at one time connected with the dispensary, but I do not know exactly what year it was. Mr. Lyon: Mr. Earley, state whether or not the amount of money paid Mr. Boykln and Towill and others was fo rthe purpose of securing the business or was it a part of the profits of which you received one-third? A. It was not from the profits that I received the third.no. Q. State whether or not it was expenses for securing the business? Mr. Nelson: We object, that has no reference to this. Mr. Lyon: State whether or not this amount was stated to be the expenses of securing the business down here? A. Goodman says it was the Mr. Lyon: Mr. Earley, how long did Mr. Tatum and Mr. Doykin reexpenses. main in Cincinnati, so far as you know? A. A couple of days, I think, Q. Mr. Earley, did you go out with Vlr. Tatum and Mr. Boykin on the night they were there, and with Mr. Goodman? A. I went to the theatre with them one night. Q. After the label transaction had been completed? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did Mr. Weiskopf make a statement to you aa to his having to turn over expense money to Goodman to get this money or not? * Mr. Nelson: We object again, your honor. Mr. Weiskopf is here present in court. We object on the ground already stated; your honor can rule as you see fit. The Court: Go ahead. Mr. Lyon: State whether or not Mr. YVeiskopf told you that? A. He told me he advanced Mr. Goodman some money. Q. Do you have any recollection O) the neighborhood of the amount? A lie told me after he gave me my check that it. was 75? Q. \\'e do not want to know anything about that?after he gave you the check. Mr. Earley, state whether or not, during the times that you were visiting Columbia here to look after the sale of liquor by the Fleischman company to the dispensary, and while Mr. Boykln was a member of the board of directors, whether you occasionally !railed him money or gave it to L.im, or anything of that sort, when he was buying whiskey from your house? Mr. Nelson: We object, your honor. This is entirely outside of this indictment. Mr. Lyon here made an argument to show that witness could show that defendant had received bribes previous to that time, as was done in the St. Louis cases. Mr. Lyon said it was the object of the prosecution to show that the dispensary officials tried to get money out of other transactions. Friday's Testimony. The case against L. W. Boykln, Jno. Bell Towill and W. O. Tatum, former dispensary officials, on a charge of conspiracy to defraud the State in the matter of the purchase of 21,000,000 labels for $25,077 drags on and when it will end no one can predict. John T. Early finished Ms testimony on Friday and Dennis Weiskopf wen t on the stand. Earley testified that he had advanced Boykins money while he was in Cincinnati buying the labels, for which he took no note, and that Boykin returned some of it when the committee was exposing the 'graft' in connection with the dispensary. Earley was asked by Mr. Lyon: "While you represented Fleischniann & Co. as a salesman here, and while Mr. Towill was on the board of directors did you make a present to Mr. Towill?" Answer: "Yes, sir, T gave him a diamond ring'." "What was the value of that | ring?" j "Probably about four or five bun- | dred dollars." "Has Mr. Towill ever returned the , ring to you?" "No, sir." "Did Mr. Towill ever express any | admiration for this ring?" "Yes, sir." On cross-examination, the witness said that ho would not hciieve uoociman on oath, and when asked by At- i tornoy Nelson if Goodman was not looked upon as a low scoundrel, Ear- t ley answered: "In my opinion, he certainly is." ( Earley stated in answer to questions that of the $0,534 he had re- * ceived on the label deal, Itoykin nor Towill nor Tatum had gotten a cent, t The figures which Goodman told him he had paid the defendants were gone over; $3,000 was given to Boykin, ac- j cording to Goodman; $1,000 to To- ^ will, $3 00 to Tatum and $900 to McCartlia. "This $6,53 4 was one-third? Who ( got another third, Goodman?" "I suppose so," said the witness. "And who got the other?" j Answer: "Weiskopf." "This agreement was made between yoji and Goodman and Weis- ( kopf?" "Well, we were the three that t made the agreement." Iirtlnnoa (1/lmlffaH ll Q f ll A Vlflfl 1 >v 1 nii'oo auniiiwti vnuv ? ? , under three indictments in this connection, and that cases would be nol prossed against him, he understood, } on condition of his testifying for the State in this and other cases. i Earley also testified of a general knowledge that Weiskopf had to "pay i $7,500 to get out," and that was c placed in a trust company, and that < when the case was concluded half was to go to the State and half to' Folder. The witneas also admitted to having been closely restricted in his movement's during his trip here on the occasion of a former trial. On redirect examination, by Solicitor Cobb, the witness was asked in connection with the agreement whereby he, Goodman and Weiskopf each got a third of certain funds from the deal; if Weiskopf had not told him that another $7,500 "expense money" had to be paid to the State dispensary board, before the division among the three could be made. Weiskoprs Testimony. After telling of his meeting in Cincinnati Messrs. Boykin and Tatum, he stated that these gentlemen visited his place of business and were stown over it. Weiskopf then gave the following testimony: Q. 'Now, "Mr. Weiskopf, when Mr. Boykin and Mr. Tatum and Mr. Goodman and Mr. Farley visited your place of business, state as nearly as you can recollect what happened on that occasion, and what was said and dri.'ip ? A. I was introduced to the gentlemen and the question of labels came up. I took either all of the gentlemen or a part of them through the establishment, to show them our facilities for turning out the work, to show the way the lithograph work was handled. The poposition was drawn up and given to Mr. Boykin alter some argument as to prices. Pnces on a portion of the labels were reduced, and Mr. Boykin signed a contract subject to the approval of Mr. To will. Q. Mr. Weiskopf, after Mr. floodman and Mr. Boykin and Mr. Tatum and Mr. Farley visited your place of business 011 that date, state whether or not Mr. Goodman applied for any money? A. Next day he did. Q How much money did you give him? A. Forty-one hundred dollars. Q For what purpose did Mr. Goodman ask you to deliver him that money ? A. For expenses. Mr. Lyon: For expense of what? A. Of securing the order. Q. Mr. Weiskopf, after that transaction, state whether or not you received any further communciation from L. W. Boykin? A. I did. Q. Have you that communcation in hand? A. I have. (Letter of Mr. Boykin accepting bid for labels offered in evidence and read to jury by attorney general.) Q. Mr Weiskopf, after the payment of this $4,100, or the letter written by Mr. Boykin, did you have any further communication with M. A. Goodman? A. I received a letter from liim. O. In consequence of receiving that letter, what did you do? A. I sent him a draft for $2,000. Mr. Lyon: Did you receive pay for the labels set forth in this invoice? A. I did Col. Nelson: We admit that he got the $3 5,000. Mr. Lyon: What did you do with the money or a part of it that you paid for? A. I gave Mr. Ear ley a check for $6,534 and Mr. Goodman a check for $6,53 4, Mr. Earley's being one check, Mr. Goodman getting a. check on October 8 for $2,000 check and on Oct. 3 0 another check. Q. Let me ask it again. You paid Mr. Goodman $6,534? A. Yes, sir. Q. You paid Earley $6,534? A. Yes. Q And you retained for yourself *0,534 ? A. Yes, sir. Q. Was the $0,100 which you -e.:Lilied was used as a nexpenses for celling tlie business in addition to Lhese three items? Mr. No/son: lie has not said the expense was $0,100. lie said it was $4,1 00. Mr. Lyon: Did you testify that if Look $0,100 to get this business? A. Yes, sir. Q. You did? A. Yes, sir. Q. And it was paid in two checks, kvasn't it? A. Yes, sir; the $G,100 was additional to the other 11T1..4 .1 ? ... 1,,, 41,^. /-.41, w nut uu ^uw mean \jy inu v/un?r? A. The $0,500 T gave Goodman md the $G,5 00 I gave ICarley. Q And the $6,500 you gave yourself? A. Yes, sir; for the firm. Q. Mr. Weiskopf, so that would nake something over $25,000 all together, wouldn't it? A. Yes, sir. Q. That accounts for over $25,000 >f this $35,677 that you received? A. Yes, sir. Q. That loaves somewhere between ^9,000 and $10,000, does it not? A. It is over $10,000, I think. Q. Does it not leave less than $10,)00? A. I figured it roughly, general; I ikink it was over $10,000. Q. Just figure it again and see vhat it is. A. I make it $9,975. Q. Where did that money go, Mr. A'eiskopf? A. To our firm; it went to our Irm. Q. Mr. Weiskopf, state whether or lot you have returned to the State )t South Carolina $7,500 on account >f the overcharges on these labels? A. I have returned $7,500 to my ! fttra CHINESE CRUISER HIRE HET IIAI CHI ANCHORS IN THE CHARLESTON HARBOR. Only Chinese Warship That Ever Visited American Waters.?Officers Extended Courtesies of Port. The Imperial Chinese cruiser Ilai' Chi, Hying the yellow and green dragon Hag of the Celestial empire, steamed into Charleston harbor Wednesday and anchored in the stream, where she may remain for several days. She is the first Chinese warship ever seen in American waters, and Charleston is the only port other than New York she has entered. The ilai Chi is bound for Havana. She came to the United States from England. where she was sent to repre sent the Chinese government at the coronation of King George V. The Hai Chi is commanded by Capt. Ting Tong, and she also Hies the flag of Rear Admiral Ching Pih Kwong. She carries a crew of several hundred men. Very trim and business-like appeared the Hai Chi as she came up to the harbor shortly before noon Wednesday. She is painted in dull grey, the conventional battleship color, and her name appears in Chinese ideographs on the stern. She is handled in iirst class sailor fashion and bears all me appearances of a warship of the most modern type, which, as a matter of fact, she is, having been only lately completed and taken over by the Chinese government. The courtesies of the port was extended to the Chinese admiral and the naval and army officials at the navy yeard and at the island forts exchanged calls with him. Admiral Ching is a highly educated Chinese who has traveled extensively, and is thoroughly familiar With the Western world. He speaks English perfectly and has visited this country before. lie has seen much service in the Chinese navy and served in the Chino-Japanese war. Somo of his officers also servod in that war. THE HOESTEIN-SI?RAI)LEYr FEUD. Sensational Affair Out of Which Grew Charge of Murder. The llolstein homicide case is expected to come lip for trial in Aiken this week. An Aiken dispatch says the case has created more interest than any that has been tried in that county in many years. In this case death of Mrs. Spra.dley, aunt of Columbus Spradley, with severely whipsix members of the llolstein family, one of the most prominent in the county, are charged with causing the ping Mrs. Spradley's husband, Hen Spradley, and of whipping young Columbus Spradley and compelling him to leave the community. The Ilolsteins and a neighbor, Doc Cockrel, are alleged to have visited the home of lien and Mrs. Nettie Spradley about six weeks ago giving Columbus and Ben Spradley a sound thrashing. The excitement is said to have caused the death of Mrs. Spradley, though this is denied by the Ilolsteins, who state they will have no iflic 1111y in showing that she was well and hearty after the affair of that Wednesday night. Ben Spradley received but one severe blow, but he hovered between life and death for several days, finally recovering. Columbus Spradley disappeared and was not located for several days, but when found it was ascertained that he had not been seriously injured. This unfortunate affair hinged about tho attentions of Columbus Spradley to Miss (lussie Hoistein, a pretty and intelligent girl. When the young man visited a school e ntertain ment in that neighborhood some weeks before he lost his heart to the winsome girl, but met with the violent opposition of her relatives. On 1 the day of the whipping young Spradley had gone to the home of his uti- 1 cle, Hen Spradley, near the Ilolsteins from his home in Augusta. ? ? i Queer Case for Divorce. Mrs. Henry Schutz, of St.. Paul, Minn., on the ground that her husband said he was a widower with three children before the marriage, 1 whereas after the knot had been tied, Mrs. Schulz was "shocked and sur- 1 prised, although fond of children, to ' learn he had ten, ranging in age ' from one to ilfteen years." * ; Strung Him lTp Quickly. At Kiev, Russia, Dimitri Rogroff, the assassin of Premier Stolypin who was condemned to death by courtmartial, was hanged Monday. Refore his execution the young man 1 asked that he might see a rabbi but refused this consolation when informed that the interview must be in the presence of officials. i attorney; I think he has made some ? arrangement for the return of the J money paid. I gave it to him under his advice. Weiskopf also gave Goodman a ba.l name. He stated that he had known i Goodman seven years and that his 1 reputation for truth and veracity and fair dealing is bad. Weiskopf would, not believe Goodman on his oath. TALK IT OVER j Result of the Canadian Elecion Biing Diseased Pro and Ceo. * I WILL IT HELP OR HURT ; m That Is What the Old Politicians Are Trying to Figure Out, the Old Guard Republicans Being Inclined to the Belief That It Will Heal the Party Breach. A Washington dispatch says tho question which is agitating the leaders of political parties and factions is how their fortunes in the approaching national campaign will be affected by Thursday's defeat of the Laurier government and Canadian reciprocity. It is evident tho replies would be as varied in character, as ?if %?/\ 4 h /\ ?\r\1 It 1 /in I irlotiro a f f OA VYUI U lllu ^uiuitai ? IV/ >T o vj L tuc tav tions which fought over the question during the special session of congress. Ofllcial Washington closely followed the returns from Canada Thursday night but remained silent regarding the outcome. Huntington Wilson, acting secretary of the state department, declined to make any statement, and there was no other high ofllcial in a position to discuss the situation. The unofficial view w?as that as Canada had rejected the agreement there was nothing for the administration to do but "make the best of the matter." That the rejection of the Canadian agreement will have a strong bearing upon the campaign of President Taft is not doubted. Some of the "Old Guard" Republicans who supported the agreement "against their better judgment" are saying its defeat will strengthen the Taft administration by removing the only issue on which there was any disagreement with the president. Most of the insurgent Republicans were opposed to the agreement and they believe their position has been made much stronger. There was no one in Washington to speak even informally for the Democrats. A majority of that party in botn senate and house voted ior tne enactment and without their votes the Taft programme for the special session would have failed. Some of the friends of the Canadian agreement do not hesitate to charge the Canadian defeat of the Laurier government to the "annexation bogy." One of the excuses for this issue was suggested by a speech of Champ Clark, of Missouri, now speaker of the house, which he delivered in favor of the agreement during the last session of the Sixtyfirst congress, when the agreement was passed by the house and held up h> the senate. Mr. Clark was making a plea for a wider market and in giving his reasons for supporting the Canadian agreement said: "I am for it because I hope to see the day when the American flag will float over every square foot of the British North American possession clear to the North Pole. They are people of our blood; they speak our language; their institutions are much like ours. They are trained in the difficult art of self-government. My judgment is that if the treaty off 1854 had never been abrogated the chances of a consolidation of these countries would have been much greater than they aro now." The Canadian press or at least no small padt of it, accepted Mr. Clark's statement as a confession tYat the real motive of tho United States was to promote annexation. In vain Mr. Clark explained that the remark was semi-jocular," although representing his personal desire. The chance remark was one of the chief arguments of Canadian opponents of the agreement. Added importance to Mr. Clark's remarks was given when he was later elected speaker, and as such became the leader of his party. Many persons, because of these circumstances, were attributing the politicil downfall of the premier of the Canadian government to the speaker of the American house of reprsntatives. ? ? Kirh Newsboy is Dead. William B. Oreenburg, the richest newsboy in St. Louis, was buried Monday. His death was caused by mcunionia. From poverty Greenburg rose to be a landlord at his death was the owner of a $112,000 apartment building and tho newsstand which he established after selling papers on tho streets for almost 23 years. Might Too Many. Testerfying that a man never gets too old to have affinities and charging that her husband, Charles W. Adams, who is sixty, had nine during their married life, Mrs. Jennie M. Adams was granted a divorce in the court at Kansas City on Saturday, she refused to accept more than $30 a month alimony. Naval Officer Killed. Ensign HAller Rolt, commanding tho gunboat Tatanga, was killed by hostile natives at Yaeans islands, In PhilHpine. Several sailors were severely injured. Tho details have not reached the Navy Department.