University of South Carolina Libraries
TURNS Slllt EllKUE. B. WTl/IK. OON FEU8KD G11A F TTCR, TKIjIsl ON FARNVM. Davperuory ofltHal Iteinte* H?>w Jtm Farnum itehaurhcsl Him And Dow and When the Graft VY.** -Mayor Samaria of Chester thr Go-ivmi Ooiumbta. Sept. 2i?If Jim Far mmm Is not a briber and a grafter he la a greatly mAligned man. Before a Jorg which la to paaa upon. Farnum's gul>t of hie right to liberty, Joe B. Wylie yesterday swore unreservedly that toe had accepted brlbea from Airnum. While Farnum l* being tried for a particular offense, that of giving a hrlhe for I1.12S to Joe B. Wylie, yet tr.e testimony ? >ok wide latitude an t Wytia testified that this transaction we* but a. i Ii vIdent of a regular bus? iness connection with Farnum. He aSt?ced that Farnum had aaalated m Wylles campaign for election; that art er being elected Wylie was ap? proached to use hla influence In be? halt ot whlvVv and beer conoeraa,j rettveented b> Farnum; that In pin ?apjawc-e of agreement Wylie exerted %aat Influence and therefor received the ramunera'*on agreed upon. That Farnum had paid him In money at times, and at other time* had given him drafts made payable to a third party. Henry 3amuela. for there was aa investigating committee trying fo get hold of Information and Wylie didn't wlah hla name to appear In writing. defense attacked Wylie With but the general opinion of those who heard the proceedings waa ejvbat while Wylie waa presented in a *Tery poor light so far aa hla past con? duct waa concerned, yet hla credi? bility waa not Impeached. The proeecutlon haa pieced togeth? er what la considered a very strong ems*, and the defense will today un fertako ta tear It down. Beginning Jplth an Unnamed draft preeented for collectlon by Henry Samuels, the prosecution traced that instrument through the banka at Cheater, Co? lons bin and Charleston to the very cash drawer of Farnum'a place of buoineos in Charleston. The defendant tld not be foreed to produce It. but secondary evidence of Its hav? ing existed la almost unimpeachable. Yesterday Joe B. Wylie swore that ?L 8. Farnum gave him a draft for Il.tSS payable to Henry Samuels and ?asBuels later testified that the dratt ?gas turned over to him and that be cashed It and gave the money to Wy He. The motive for such transactions was also presented with skill. Th? "purchasing clause" of the old dis? pensary law wss put In evidence. a<* Krere bid books, minute hooka, rec? ords of purchases and of awards and invoice hoc!:?. The minutes of March, l tos showed that the board of whl*"h Wylie was a member had set on* to "order out'' whiskey only when two members of BCSjfd signed a warrant k authorising tl e commissioner to d ? so. But In September of the tags* year a rev rule was pasaed and the clerk oi the roard was author!*3 ??< order bulk g">d? when the supply on hand shou'l ma low. The point war stressed that t was i at makbm award i gat olds that counted, but It* fordet ln< n*:t" the etuff already nom kially purchased. Therefore It was wort.i while 'or a whiskey hoes- to hare aa a friend In court a asembvr of the bo .r l Wylie swore that I? was In part settlement for Just such services that ho was given the $1 If I on Septembt.* 14.. 19 0? When ecu i leassembled yest*?.Va\ morntnr Wyi'e was on the stand, il ? idsntlfled seve.Ml books of record a-o. then got down to the senaational tes? timony published elaewhere. I Mr. J. L. Thorpe was again put on the stand. Mr. Abney had Mr. Thorpe to Identify some books of original entry which were put In evidence. There are now In evidence about 50 books. Including those of the dis? pensary and of the banking Institu? tion*. The defense had tried to bring it eat while Wylie was on the stand that Farnum's deals with Wylie to vote for Fsrnutn'H houses had not been to to the injury of the State of South Carolina. Wylie had sworn that he had been persuaded Into the grafting business by the blandishments to the effect that *ome whiskey house had to g-t order*, then why not Farnum's. provided Farnum offered the St.it?* fair prb es. The effort was made to get *.n evidence the fact that Km num s pric es were actually hu,I t'ouns'l f??r defense iirmo-tl th.it this was not proving bribery, but fraud, and the fraud Indictment was sepa? rate Judge stemming**! agreed with counsel for defense. Mr Abney proceeded to argu.? that he wss not seeking to contradict h'< own witness?Wylie?but to show t state of farts whlrh had been d oj ed Imperfectly hy the d? f? nne and pg wished to K?*t the whole matt ?r in th?- paaar4 Mi wished to show thai v oile the Anheusei Musrh people, In letter read by the defense, claimed to ho sole makers of I'udwelser. and 8/MM th y launed further that they could not sell to the State of South Carolina at less than $12.02 per ten dozen bottles, yet there were invoices in Thorpe's books to show that the dispensary had bought Budwelser from Guckenhelmer of Savannah at $10.50 for the same quantity. Mr. Abney claimed the right to bring this out to show how Farnum could afford to pay rebates. It was then approaching the hour for recess and Judge Memmlnger ! took the matter under consideration. When the session reconvened Mr. Thorpe was recalled and stated that he knew the Anheuser-Busch Com? pany to be an Incorporated concern, according to the invoices, but that he did not know who the stockhold? ers were. He did not know the houses represnetsd by Farnum. J. H. Lucas of the Bank of Char? leston was the next witness. Mr. Lu? cas was shown the draft book of that bank but as he did not make the en? try for the collection of this particular draft Mr. Cochran objected to any testimony. The witness, under ex? amination by Mr. Stevenson, explain? ed the method of making the en? tries and it was brought out that had draft not been ppid It would have b'.'.i returned. Judge Memmingcr. hasme*. ruled that the testimony could not be Introduced. Mr. Henry Samuels was then ci.ll ed. He Is now mayor of Chester. An jwering Mr. Abney he was ^8 yearn of age and engaged In the mercantile business. He usually signed his nam a H Samuels.'* He had known Jos. B. Wylle for 15 or 10 years. In March, June and September, 1906, he was In Columbia representing whiskey houses. Mr. Samuels named a number of these firms. He was agent under W. D. )Roy for some of these concerns. On one occasion he went up on the Chester train with Wylle and he was given a draft for $1,125 by this dispensary di? rector. Tho bank gave him about 11.000 of this In bills of $100 denomi? nation. A few days later he turned over this money to Wylle. The drafi. was signed by Farnum and drawn on either a hank or a Ann. he could noj remember which, li was given to hin before WyHe went to his home in Richburg. Af? terwards he called up Wylle over ihe 'phone and told him the draft had been cashed. "Keep It until Mon? day." said Wylle. This was no: |fcs ft*t tlmt drafts had been giver, him in his name to be cashed for Wylle. W ylle told him that Farnum had settled with him (Wylle). Th? wit? ness had no Interest in the matter, lie had traveled In May. 1900. Ui P' Mium "whooping up Long Horn gin." He ivas paid $250 a month and expenses and Farnum had settled up promptly at the end of three weeks. Farnum represented a number of houses. Including the Richland Dis? tillery Company. Lanahan, "The Big i Four" and others. When working for Farnum he visited the dispensers, i Induced them to order the stuff. He. sent a copy of this order to Farnum und another to the State dispensary. Under cross-examination Samuels said he came here very often several years to visit a woman of Ill-repute. He gave this woman money to build a house. He also played cards some? times for money. "I got no rakeoff on this draft." he said. "I did this for a friend because I got my orders and mad ' my money on theso com? missions paid -me." The witness got checks from Far? num In 1907 and 1908, the largest be? ing for $500. In 1906 the only check he received was for $300. This was for work of three weeks bot Farnum and Wylie fell out over the manner of shipping "Long Horn'* to dispen? sers. He paid Wylie on 150 cases ofs goods one-half of the commission amounting to $300. "Nobody could get any business down there unless they paid commis? sions to the board," said the witness. The witness evidently had consid? erable trouble with the dispensary commission. He was summoned to appear, according tc his statement, and at once consulted an attorney now connected with the defense. This Attorney said there was no occasion for a lawyer In a case where Samuels had benn summoned as a witness. The witness after considerable question? ing finally admitted the testimony brought out above. He said that he had been advised by his attorney. Mr. Paul Hemphill. to tell everything and J it would probably bs to his advan? tage. "And you are not going to he pro?cnted .'" queried the defense. "I understand that's what It meant hut I hnVS never hern told SO. My attorney told rn?? not to worry," wan the response. Samuels prod need ? little memo Lindum book shewing the coinmis sions paid and the schedule required l?y thi board. Wylle had prepared the sch< dule and he, the witness, always paid the rat?' tlxed hy Wylie. The boot) was introduced In evi denes and then there was a pleasaul little spat between the attorney* on tin* admission of the book. JudgO Messes lagst ruled thai it was avl dsncs The eommkrsjlons paid were given to Wylle. II? was als?, paid by Farnum for work done among The county dispensaries but this amount? ed to little. J. A. V. Schmidt of St. Louis WAS then called and testified that he Is employed by the Anheuser-Busi h Brewing Association. This was all asked the witness. Mr. Stevenson then announced that the State rested its case. Columbia, Sept. 24.?Judge Mem mlnger will charge the Farnum Jury tomorrow morning at 9:30 o'clock. The arguments were concluded at 5:20 oclock this afternoon. Attorney P. H. Nelson making the last speech for the defence. The attorneys for the defendant sent up their request to charge before the arguments com? menced today.and at the conclusion of the arguments this afternon,Judge Memmlnger after sending the Jury to their rooms at a local hotel, requested to hear from the defendant upon cer? tain requests, and after hearing argu? ments both from the attorneys of the defendant and prosecution, announced that he would look over the author? ities tonight and pass upon the re? quests to-morrow morning. The case will go to the Jury some time to-mor' row. Branding Messrs Wylie and Sam? uels, witnesses for the State, who gave sensational testimony on a previous day, as thieves and conspirators, trying to keep out of trouble and save their "own hides," and appealing to the Jury not to render a verdict of guilty unless they were satisfied beyond a doubt that the men referred to told J the truth, Attorney X?. H. Nelson, In the last argument of the Farnum trial, made a strong speech for the defendant this afternoon. In refer? ence to Wylle and Samuels, Mr. Nel? son said: "Gentlemen, they were thieving and each one was watching the other." He spent some time In dissecting the evidence as given in the case. Frequent sarcastic refer? ences were made to Attorney General Lyon and his associates. He warned the Jury that It was dangerous to take the testimony of accomplices without corrorboration. In opening his argument he called attention to two acts of the Legisla? ture, one creating the board and gov? erning it, and the other in reference to the sum appropriated for making an investigation of the dispensary sys? tem. He stated that the case was one of the most peculiar that he had ever known. Reference was made to the winding-up commission. He stated that it was a public record that the affairs of the old State dispensary had not been settled up. It is rumored, he said, that claims were not paid by the commission unless certain evi? dence was produced that would tend to Incriminate certain persons. Mem? bers were elected by the legislature and commissioned by the governor, and he asked who should be held re? sponsible should anything go wrong. Referring to witnesses Wylie and Sameuls, counsel severely arraigned their characters, both public and pri? vate. He charged Attorney General Lyon with Issuing a bench warrant for the arrest of Samuels and having him brougbt down to Columbia. This statement brought Mr. Lyon to his feet, who denied that he had issued a bench warrant for the arrest of Samuels. Mr. Nelson admitted the mistake. Mr Lyon also challenged a statement by Mr. Nelson in reference to no funds being paid out by the windlng-up commission, and asked the court that the attorney for the defendant be re qsrrred to stick to the case and not give testimony before the Jury. Mr. Nelson nhen pointed to the at? torneys for the State and asked who was paying them. Counsel stated that Mr. Cobb, the solicitor, had not been called in to aid the prosecution. He then asked why the solicitors of the State had not been called in to aid the attorney general. Counsel said: "We do not deny the fact that the draft for $1,125 was placed in the Bank of Chester," neith? er that it was sent from Chester to Columbia nor on to Charleston. "When they traced it to Charleston they must go a step further," said counsel. 4 Tbcy must show you be? yond a reasonable doubt that it was paid by Farnum's direction." After discussing the movement of the draft and contention of the prosecution in reference to It, naming the dates, counsel said: "How could it be in Charleston and Columbia al the same time." Mr. Nelson spoke for several min? utes in very sarcastic terms, compar? ing Wylie to Judas and also telling of the relations of Wylle to Samuels. He scouted the idea that Farnum would be BUOh 11 fOOl as to send out drafts by such a man as Wylie. He character? ized the entire draft transaction as being very Improbable. He said that Wylte'l conscience did not commence to hurt him until he found that Samuels had given liirn away, and lie asked Attorney General Lyon it he did not say he had a winde "hunch t<> convict." Mr. Lyon In reply asked Mr, Nelson i if he had not seen the Indictments. I The trial and argument developed the j technical point ;is to whether the de? fendant is guilty of bribery or wheth er the money ho Is alleged to have given Wylie was in payment of re? bates for liquors orde' ^d. rr,ls and other points of law involve in the case will be decided by ;e Mem? minger. The first announcement made today was that the defense would put up no witnesses. Col. Nelson stated that the matter had been gone over very carefully, and defendant's attorneys did not deem it necessary to put up any testimony. Stenographer W. H. McFeat work? ed until 3 o'clock this morning in transcribing yesterday's testimony, which was gone over by the defense. The time set for the arguments was two and a half hours for each side. The court stated to the Jury that every defendant is innocent until he is proven guilty. Judge Memminger referred to the incident that came up on the opening day of the trial, when the State's attorneys brought up the non-compliance of the defendant with the subpoena sent him. It was claim? ed by the defense at the time that there was comment upon the defnd ant's non-compliance, and the court called attention of the Jurors to the fact that if they should find he de? fendant guilty and the conclusion was based at all upon this incident, then the defendant should be acquit? ted. The court also called attention ?o defendant's right under the law to remain mute and that this should not be taken against the defendant. Judge Memminger ruled that the defense should have the closi ng argu? ment. There was discussion on this point, but the court held that he would give the defense the reply. Attorney Stevenson opened for the State. He called attention to the al? legations in the indictment and ex palined to the jury the exact nature of the charge relieved of as much of the legal verbiage as possiple. He ex? plained the method of purchasing liq? uors under the State dispensary law. Mr. Stevenson reviewed the testimony of the State's witnesses as to the $1, 125 draft. He referred to the num erous bids before the board from March to September, and the awards made to the houses represented by the defendant. The amount of awards to Farnum's houses, according to couneel, was $824,000 during the six months referred to. This was about or.e-thlrd of the whiskey bought, it wns stated. j Mr. Stevenson commented upon the profits for the dispensary, claiming that the people paid for the alleged increased price in the liquors. Counsel summed up the testimony {aa to the Jl.lir? payment alleged to have been paid to Wylie by Farnum. In the opinion of the court, as in? dicated, counsel passed beyond the limits of the ethics of the court room when he gratuitously referred to the religious beliefs of the personal eoun ec for the defense, and was promptly caned down by Judge Memminger. "I will not allow personal allusions to counsel to enter into this or any other cast*," said Judge Memminger. Colin* pal icferred to by Mr. Stevenson had rot even entered the case. Mr. Stev? enson apologized to the court. Counsel closed by commenting upon the alleged offer of defendant to have Wylie give him notes to cover the amount allegd to have been paid, ac? cording to Mr. Wylie's testimony. Mr. Cochran, for the defense, com? bined in his argument some proposi? tions of law with the alleged facts as testified to. He sprang a surprise by claiming that there was no evidence that the alleged draft was cashed in Richland county. He contended that this would annul the charge in ill4) indictment. Mr. Cochran touched upon other points of law, including those in ref? erence to common law, practically the same as referred to in defense's de? murrer. As to the first count coun? sel claimed it must have been shown that the alleged draft was paid after Mr. Wylie was elected to the dispen? sary board. As to the system of rebate de? fense's attorney claimed that there was no evidence that this alleged schedule was agreed upon by Wylie and Farnum in the particular matter charged against the defendant. The next proposition of law laid down by Mr. Cochran was that it is not safe to convict a man upon the uncorroborated testimony of an ac? complice. Counsel commented upon the law of accomplices in such cases as the one being tried. Mr. Cochran referred to the incon? sistency of the charge of bribery, when there are indictments charging conspiracy. if there are rebates as the hitter indictment! state, how could the bribery charge be? counsel argued. As to the corroboration of an ac? complice, Mr. Cochran argued that the corroboration must be upon some material point, and at the same time must not depend upon the evidence of the accomplice'! testimony itself. That there is no corroboration in the case waa Mr. Cochran s claim. Mr. Cochran'a closing words was an impassioned appeal to the jury not to convict the defendant upon the testi? mony of "such men as Wylie and Samuels.'' Th?' deft nse'i contention was that Samuels and Wylie had con COt* ted ih<- seheilM by which both shou'd say that he money came from Farnum, when, as set forth by the defendant's attorneys, it might be presumed that the checks sent Sam? uels in payment of services by Far? num were taken advantage of by the State's two witnesses as acting against the defendant. Mr. Cochran made a telling and logical speech to the court and Jury. Col. Abney, who has conducted j most of the examination for the State, I made the next argument, having been ! allotted one hour. Col, Abney stated that he had been employed to repre? sent the State under the statute, and that he had no personal interest in the case. He called the attention of the Jury to the law that existed as to the State dispensary. Col. Abney referred to the death of the old State dispensary, and claimed that this has done away with the fraud and corruption that was said to have existed in the management of that institution. Counsel pointed out the pecautions taken to keep every influence away from the meetings of the State Board of Control. But, Col. Abney stated, these intentions were not carried out and that the lobbies were filled with agents of whiskey houses at the meetings of the board, j In ringing words Col. Abney traced [ the transactions that caused the State J dispensary system to fall. I Com g down to the present case counsel pictured the temptation of Wylle and the heed the members of the board paid thereto. Counsel traced out for the Jury the main points of the testimony given by J. B. Wylie, and based upon it a state? ment of the alleged transaction. The details of Wylle's confession were set forth by counsel, who argued to the Jury that all other matters brought out In the cause of the trial corrobo? rated the testimony given by th*? for? mer State dispensary director. Mr. Abney wove the chain of evidence into an apparently unbreakable link, and pointed out the simple proof that he said the State had brought. Mr. Abney made a titrong showing for the 1 State in eloquent terms. I Mr. Hagood for the defense, com I manted upon the duty of the Jurors. "Well and truly try, and according to I the evidence." The witness, J. B. I Wylie, was put on the rack by coun 1 sei being referred to as "principal," I and not accomplice, in the alleged transactions. That Samuels and Wy I lie did everything to save their "own I hides." "Convicts save in name only," I was the way counsel characterized I the two principal witnesses for the I State. That this sort of witnesses I would lie was a further charge, and would put up a scheme to convict j some one to save themselves. Counsel pointed out the Injustice of the State official being given im? munity, and one representative of whiskey houses being brought in*o j court and put on trial. I He asserted that Wylie had his "story" down well from reiteration, and that he knew it well when he went on the stand: that Wylie kept I all the money Wylie said he got, and I that no money was returned to the I State. These are some of th?? attacks made upon witness by counsel in his argument, j Samuels' character was severely at I tacked also by counsel. Words were 1 not spared to bring before the jury j the kind of men that testified against I Farnum. Thus far the contention of j the defense was that the story told J on the stand by Samuels and Wylie I was concocted. That this was done J to save themselves. The State's contention was that the J testimony of both these men was cor? roborated, and that the chain of evi I dence was complete. Mr. Hagood referring to the bank's transmittal book, explained that the date on which the draft was sent from here, the 17th of September, and the defense, he argued, connected this draft for $1,125 with the cash, entry in the Consumers' Beer Bot? tling Establishment. That the draft I could not have left here on the 17th and reach Charleston on the same day and be entered on the bank's book the very day. This point was pressed strongly by the defense. The amounts charged up to Farnum for due bills, etc.. was also dated the 17th of September. There seemed here to be some lapse in the State's showin?. Closing his argument, counsel again attacked the Character of the State's star witness, reading portions of his testlmon) and branding him as a "self-confessed theif." The first active part in the courl room was taken today by Attomej General Lyon. As is well known Mr. Lyon has been very active In the bringing together <?t' evidence In the alleged graft cases. He was on the original Investigating committee of the i< glslature, and ever since that time he has been busy In pushing the prosecution of the men who were con? nected with the State dispensary In 1906. in closing the state's argument Mr. Lyon addreased himself to the closing feature of Mr. Hagood's argument as to the draft. Counsel claimed that I he chain Was too strongly fixed h the mind of the Jury to be thus brok? en. Inferring to Mr. Cochrans state? ment that some of the guilt> were let. go. Mr. Lyon said: "We've got a bunch Of them here, and if evidence is worth anything we are going to convict them." That ft was a well established prin? ciple of law that some of the guilty had to be let go. He referred to the history of the old State dispensary* and the alleged corruption therein. "We have broken the dam. We have let out the water, and we have the old eel here now." said l^r. Ly? on He called upon the Jury not to let the eel go. "To what ends have the attorneys gone in this defense to besmirch the characters of Henry Samuels and J? B. Wylie." Mr. Lyon touched upon the matter? brought out by defense to impeach the character of the witnesses. He said the commission summoned Henry Samuels early one morning: "and we didn't intend for him to have time to consult anybody." The testi? mony referred to j.? Samuels on the stand before the commission as to. checks was commented upon by Ufr. Lyon. All these matters have been touched upon the evidenc. Reverting to the alleged conflict of dates of the draft and. its. payment,. Mr. Lyon said that the witnesses testi? fied to the receiving of the draft and that the check was paid in Charles? ton. Mr. Lyon laid it at the feet of the defendant that the alleged bribe was given, and spoke of him as the "bee* king" and "grafter" of Charleston. "How could the $400 election, money be used legitimately?' askedL Mr. Lyon. "The only reason the defense offer* is that you all should not believe Henry Samuels and J. B, Wylie, when they cannot produce one scintilla of evidence or any witness to contradict" their testimony." Mr. Lyon commented further upon? the fact that defense put up no wit? nesses to impeach the character of the State's witnesses. "And,"- conclud? ed Mr. Lyon, "Henry S a mu?te is now mayor of Chester." Mr. Lyon did not* make an extended argument, as he has not been feeling well for the pa?t week. "Say to the people of South Caro? lina that her shame and her humilia? tion must be wiped away. Write 8a verdict of guilty against the defend? ant. Do not write a verdict that will be the symbol of countenancing graft." FATTEN BULLING COTTON. Wheat Fit Leader Says Staple Must. Go Up?Supply is Very Short.. New York, Sept. 23.?James A Patten, who cornered the wheat mar- - ket in Chicago, today is in New York* buying cotton. Somebody aahexTi Mr.. Patten if he were selling the roagle "Selling cotton?" he repeated. "No. I am here in a big bull pool. We are buying cotton, and we are buying if because we think it is bound to go up. There is a short crop and the de mand is sure to be heavy, I thinar. that cotton is going to rise to. 17 cents on this bulge. To telV the truth, I wouldn't be surprised If It * were to go as high as 20 cents." Somebody reminded Mr. Patterr ' that he went into the wheat market '-" under similar circumstance*, "Yts. Thats' right." he said. Uk. - Patten had reasons to back up hla belief that cotton is going to keep on rising. "The tariff on woolen goods is* bound to have a big effect on cotton,'* he said. "Mon are going to use more cotton for different purposes. Auto? mobile tires use up 350,000 bales 0? year alone. "Cotton sells on its merits and the* t.nual consumption of wheat In? creases. People are getting -eady fts* buy more clothes this year. They have more money to spend and the trade in cotton goods is bound to feet the general prosperity." The pool in which Mr. Patten is* interested is said to consist of abour a million bales. TAFT OPENS GUNNISON TUNNEL-. Big Irrigation Project Put in Opera? tion. afontrose, Col., Sept. 23.?President* Taft passed the day on the western? slope of the Etocky Mountains, and amid a succession of scenes typical of the av at West* rn country. Lato ihif* afternoon Mr. Taft stood aa thr brink ?f the dei . ? Irrigation ditch in alt.' the West, and tar out in the foothills, with not a settlement in sight, made the electrical connection which start? ed a flow of water through the Gun nlson tunnel that will reclaim 140.000 acres of arid land. It was the set ting In operation Of the gveatest irri? gation project the United states gov? ernment has ever undertaken^ easa the opening was made the oeeash not a joyous celebration throughout the Valley of Uncompahgre. Some women are such bar&ruta fiend-; th:?t they .would demand cot *\~*.es for n ?UMrlca1 operation.