The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1883-04-12
LOCAL INTELLIGENCE.
The Sum Up.

On the part of the members of the leg
islature who introduced and endorsed
the resolution creating this committee
there seems to have been a misappl chem
sion as TO the charges made by Texas
Siftings, and the truth If which Is the
subject of your investigation.
1t has been claimed that one of the
charges IN de was that the votes of men,
bers had been "bOught by gold" The
clause in the article reads:
Think of all this, aud tell US what
should be done to the lawmakers who,
bought by gold, will vote to turn 1000 OF
their fellO creatures over to the merci-
less hands of men whose pecuniary in
terests will prompt them in the future to
treat them as they have treated them in
the past! How shall we speak of the
legislators who will commit such an infa.
nous outrage on justice, humanity and
civilization"
Thequestion here is, "What should be
done with men who, bought by gold, will
Yote!"
At the time the article was written, a
vote on the penitentiary lease had not
been taken. We spoke of something that
might take place at future time-some-
thing that we believed possibly would
take place if Tublic sentiment was not
aroused and weak members were not de-
TERED from allowing themselves to be
brought under the influence of power
iul and rich lobby. There is no charge
contained in that clause, hut we did
charge that, 'aided by their bank ac-
count" the lessees Influenced the mem
bers of the legislature. We now reiter-
ate this charge-a charge that we claim to
have proved by sworn testimony, given
by reliable witnesses before this commit
tee.
Before the article containing this charge
WAS written, we had undisputable EVIL
dence that the lessees had been spending,
and we're continuing to spend, consider
able sums OF money : a conciliating menu
bers Of the legislature. That any money
did lind its way directly from the lessees'
bank account into the pocket of any iegis-
Iator, we had no positive knowledge.
Knowing how difficult such transactions
are 10 prove we made no charge that any
member had received money in any direct
way from the lessees. The substance of
what we did say was that the lessees had
used money to influence the members of
the legislature. They and "their bench
men" had rooms where entertainments
were given almost nightly to members of
the legislature.
These things were. known TO us, and
we felt it to be Tor the public good that
the people OF Texas should also know
them.
The influences being used by what was
known rs the penitentiary lobby, were
matters OF common talk at the capital, and
that these Influences were actively at
work, we never heard denied until the
article in Texas Siftings RULED the tenn
per of The eXcitable members who intro
duced and endorsed the resolution calling
for an Investigation.
We have furnished yOR with several
IN = To-. "A
others; who have sworn that there was
always free liquor and cigars at the head
quarters Of the lessees. All these wit
nesses with one exception testified to
having seen members OF the legislature
there and to having seen them drinking
and PLAYING poker with MIR. Cunningham.
one of the lessees, and others. We were
debarred, by the ruling of the committee,
from a. King witnesses To give the names
of the members of the legislature who
played poser with the lessees and their
friends, and witnesses were not allowed
to answer questions as TO whether they
saw certain members win money in these
games ut the headquarters OF Mr.. Cum
ningham, one OF the lessees.
One saloon keeper testified before this
committee that Mr.. Cunningham, who
was interested in the ratification Of the
lease, spent several hundred dollars in
his saloon in entertaining his Cunning
ham's) friends most OF the friends being
members of the legislature, and that Gen.
eral Handy and Mr.. Sinnot, who were
both directly interested in the ratIfica-
lion. each spent large sums OF money in
entertaining members of the legislature.
There are about ifty-nine saloons in Aus
tin, but we brought before the committee
the prOprietors of only one of them as
we did not feel It to be necessary to prove
the total amount of money spent, but
merely that money had been spent 10y the
lessees on mem bers of the Legislature,
and with intent to influence their votes.
NO sane man could be made TO believe
that men Interested in bill, the passage
of which would probably profit them
many hundred thousand dollars, would
spend money on members of the legisla-
ture for the purpose Of antag0nizing
them. Neither could he be persuaded
that 1t was the promptings of generous
hearts that caused them TO spend 1t, Else
they would not have squandered almost
all their time and much money on men,
bers of the legislature to the exclusion of
fore, we claim that it must be granted
that it was done to influence members OF
the legislature TO vote in favor OF the rat
ificatiOn of The penitentiary lease.
Whether members were Influenced
we will allow their constitu-
ents to judge. They know them
better than we do, but we will, in this
connection, refer to the evidence of the
first witness examined. who testified
that he interviewed the representatives
shortly after the legislature met and
found nine-tenths opposed 10 notifications;
and then " called attention to the vote
on the question sixty days afterwards,
when, as the records will show, only
about two-thirds opposed ratification.
We, therefore, respectfully submit
that we have proved the truth o. the
charges made by us In the article re-
ferred to, and that the facts known TO us,
at the time said ar ice was written, iusti-
fed us in making the charges.
uuE nnUDTG