The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1878-05-03

LoyE11's AxswER-A day or two ago,
a. noted In our court reports, arnle was
Issued in the Circuit Court against Ar
thur W. Lowell, and made returnable yes.
terdAy, 10 show cause why he should not
be named as prosecutor in the caHes oil the
young men indicted for gambling upon
his testimony, and give security for costa
10 the same. LoyelPs answer was filed
yesterday, and Is as follows:
Your respondent makes answer and
says that on the 9Th day Of February,
1878, he was summoned Is witness TO
appear on the 4th day Of March, 1873,
before the grand jury Of the County Court
Of Ohio county, for the March term there.
Of. That Immediately after the service
Of said summons, this respondent con.
yersed with the defendant and others 10
know what course to pursue; that he was
advised by defendant, Waugh, and others,
TO get out OF town and out Of the State
until after the said grand jury should ad.
journ; that respondent left, and did not
appear before said grand jury In obedi-
ence to said summons; that afterwards,
to-wit: on the frat day Of April, 1878, q
rule was served upon him 10 show cause
whyhe should not be fined Tor his contempt
in failing to appear as witness before
said grand Jury. That afterwards, to.wit:
on The eighth day Of April, 1878, an at
tachment was issued against him, that at
the time Of the issuing Of said process,
respondent was still absent from the
State; that respondent received notice
from bis father 10 return; that as soon as
he received said notice he returned 10
this city; that upon his arrival he con.
suited with counsel and was advised 10
remain, and il again summoned before
the grand jury 10 appear and testify that
on the 18Th Of April, 1878, this respond
ent received q summons TO appear as
witness before the grand jury OF the pres
ent term OF this honorable court; that In
obedience 10 the command OF the process
Of this court this respondent did appear
was sworn and called before said grand
Jury and gave his testimony.
Respondent for answer 10 the natter
set forth 10 the aiIidayits Of w. b. Waugh
Kline, Robinson, Stanley, Bulger and
Wheat, which respondent has read, says
II is not true that the prosecution spoke
Of compelling any money, that he Is in
formed and believes that II is the inten
Of the father OF this afiiant 10 institute
civil suits toIrecover the money lost by
this afiiant in gambling with the defend
ant and others. II is not true that thii
affiant ever demanded money from de-
PENDANT, or anyone else 10 settle any claim
or demand; and unless defendant and
others would so settle, that alfiant would
institute criminal prosecution against
them. Nor is il true that this affiant cent
q letter or letters TO the defendant OF
any one else threatening them with q
criminal prosecution unless defendant
would settle with affiant, or ever knew Of
or assisted in any letter ever written fol
that purpose; the attendance oil respon-
dent IA q witness before the grand jury
was caused solely by the process oil The
court, respondent understanding that the
rule and attachment which had been
Issued agaiust him, had been Issued from
this court, and not knowing that there
was more than one court which had any.
thing to do with these matters, and his
attendance before the grand jury was mol
for any other purpose than to avoid pun
ishment for his former refusal 10 attend
and obey the process Of this court.
No letter was ever written or remark
or thought entertained by respondent, or
40 far as be knows, by bis father, affect
ing in any way the collection OF any
claim or debt by instituting prosecutions
or appearing before the grand Jury. IL
testilying before the grand jury, respon-
dent gave the names OF every person
with whom lie had been engaged in gam
ing, TO the best Of his recollection.
Respondent never played "iaro" in hii
life, and never played "poker" until Au
gust, 1877, when he played in the city o.
Wheeling, and Is not and never was q
professional gambler, and never wen
with such to other cities. And respon
dent has lost in playing with the personi
named by him TO the grand jury, at least
$1,000 more than he ever won at the
game.
Your respondent further says that he il
not voluntary informer, that he has nc
more interest in the said prosecution thar
other citizens OF the State; that this re-
spondent was compelled by the process OIL
this court TO become witness, and there
fore cannot be called a prosecutor. And
the respondent therefore asks that the
rule against him be dismissed with his
reasonable costs in this behalf expended
and he will ever pray, &c.
.. ...r A.W. LOWELL.
The attorneys for the defendants took
until this morning TO reply by affidavit &c
the new matter set up.