The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-08-11
BOWLING WILL NOT ANSWER
The Committee of Inquiry Fail to OBJ
tain Any Statement from Him.
lie Volunteers to Talk Provided the Commit
tee Will Hear Him Privately-Implicat-
ed COuncilmen Deny His Aspersions.


the Council of 1s821893, raised by Councilman
Dowling's assertions that he had paid such mem
bers to vote in the interest of the Citizens Street
Railway Company, met last night in the city
clerks Office. There were present Chairman
Pearson and Messrs. McClelland, Mack,
Reinecke and Trussler. with half dozen wit
nesses ready for the ordeal A half hour was
used in private consultation by the committee
with Acting City Attorney Elliot,
near at hand, to explain whatever
in the way of law related to the
investigation. 1t was some minutes after 8
O'Clock before the committee came together.
Chairman Pearson had the room cleared of all
who did not come under the rule of Abundance,
after which he had conversation with Council
man Bowling and the latters attorney, Mr..
Cropsey. He then called upon Mr.. Bowling to
make any statement he desired Attorney
Cropsey said he understood that this was only
committee of inquiry and his client waived all
irregularities, but he came there as one accused,
and he desired to know the specific charges
against him, there absence Of any
charges pro forma so far. When these are pre-
pared he is ready to make any state
ment required of him relative to
what has been said about the
matter in the press. Until this is done he did
not think it right to place Mr.. Bowling before
the committee. He wished also, when such
charges are made, to conine the inquiry to the
committee and the one accused as certain news
papers had appeared in the character of prose-
cutors.
Chairman Pearson said the questions that the
committee wished to ask Mr.. Bowling had been
published in the Journal as the interrogatories
put to him in the grand jury-room. They also
related to what had been published in other
papers
Mr.. Cropsey replied that he thought his client
entitled to a formal charge before these proceed
ings went any further. He said the ordinances
under the charter referring to the trial of mem
bers of Council required that specific charges
should be made by some citizen or any member
of the Council. This had not been done, and
therefore he could but ask behalf of his client
to know what the charges are.
Mr.. Trussler admitted that it was the right
way Of proceeding but he thought they could,
as a committee of inquiry, look into the truth
fulness Of the statements published in the
papers
Chairman Pearson was also inclined to adopt
the view of Attorney Cropsey, but said that the
committee might proceed in taking the state
| ments Of the ex-councilmen to whom Mr. Dow
ling had referred in his public talk Mr..
Reinecke said that the ex councilmen might
claim the same right as Mr.. Bowling
The request of MIR. Bowling to have the
charges against him presented in legal form was
granted, and until then that gentleman escapes
the necessity of making any statement
VIM. II. Tucker was then called and sworn. To
the latter proceeding Mr.. Cropsey objected, as he
thought that, AS committee of inquiry, it
wished note TO be made of his
objection. Mr.. Tucker was then asked
Were you at the postoffice Aug. 2, and did you
then hear Mr. Bowling say that he had bought
NnY tlD,nv rs hate havy
| all Republicans, every mothers of them;
and he bought them cheap; that it was not
necessary to buy Democrats, for they were all
right from the start, and that he had the papers
to prove what he saids'
Mr.. Tucker-He made practically that state
ment l did not hear him say every mothers
son of them, or that he bought them cheap He
said he understood the situation and that he was
no fool. He claimed to know what he was
talking about.
In reply to Mr.. Reinecke, the witness said
that Mr. Bowling came into the postofice just
after he had been talking with Major Robbins
about the first reference in the Times to a man
who was enjoying a pension from the street
railway company. Bowling was jokingly asked
concerning the affair He said he went to
Colonel Holloway and told him he ought to
name the man to whom he referred. He said to
that gentleman what appeared in the Times.
He (Dowling) recognized the gravity of the
charges. and said he was ready to answer any
thing in regard thereto, even before the grand
jury.
Nelson Yoke was asked if he had ever directly
or indirectly received any money or favor from
Colonel johnson or any agent of the street rail
way company in the way of a bride while he was
| a member of Council in 1923 He answered
| no. and gave the same answer to the question
| did Mr.. Bowling ever offer you any money or
| favor to vote for the Citizens Street Railway
| Company during such time"
John Egger Ed Brundaee. Barton W. Cole,
w. H. Morrison and Henry Mauer emphatically
replied in the negative when the questions, as
above given, were asked them. Mr.. Cropsey
was anxious to have it go upon record that his
client willing to admit that Mr.. Bedford and
Mr.. Caylor, the only two witnesses from the old
Council absent, would give similar answers:
Chairman Pearson said the committee preferred
to have the gentlemen here.
Mr.. Cropsey then said as the prosecution was
substantially in, Mr. Bowling would make full,
free and frank statement to the committee as
one of inquiry, with the condition that every
body, press included, be excluded from the
room He thought this was no more than right,
as the committee held about the same relation
to Council the grand jury did to the courts.
Mr.. Trusler did not think any good purpose
could be served by a secret statement Of Mr..
Bowling 1t was matter of public Importance,
and the reporters would get it anyway,
SO it was better for them to have the statement
at first hand
Chairman Pearson said if Mr.. Bowling would
hear the only two questions the committee de-
sired him to answer, he believed the difficulty
would be overcome. Mr.. Cropsey asked to read
the questions, and the paper was passed to him.
He and Bowling then retired for consultation,
during which time Allen Caylor came in and
answered negatively the questions that had been
asked Yoke. Morrison and others
Mr.. Cropsey returned and said that the prose
cutor had drawn the questions in such manner
as to mix up things that were pertinent with
those that were not. The grand jury matter
was singularly mixed up with the newspaper
reports. His client wished the questions to be
separated, and, if it was consistent with the will
of the committee, he asked that the inquiry be
continued until this evening when Mr. Bowling
would be ready to answer all
the questions freely and fully. He
wanted the questions separated, however,
The commtte met Mr. Cropsey and Councilman
Bowling half way by adjourning until next
Friday evening. In the meantime Mr.. Cropsey
10 to have the questions prepared by the com
mittee. to separata them in a manner suitable to