The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-03-20
INSIDE HISTORY OF A LAW.
The Influences Under Which the In
diana Telephone Bill Was Enacted.
Statesman Williams Says an Attempt Was
Made to Defeat the Measure by Bribery,
but Others Tell Different Story.

letter inquired journal reporter or hon.
John NJ Butler.
Mr.. Butler appeared to be somewhat tumbled
up and down in his mind as he endeavored to
recall to memory the great name Of Williams.
The reporter aided him by explaining that the
Williams referred to was the Knox county
statesman who was the author of the famous
telephone bill. Mr.. Buffers countenance lighted
up at once What does the article say9' he in
quired. He was handed the following printed
slip, special to the Cincinnati Commercial
Gazette, dated Vincennes. March IT,
Samuel w. Williams, the author of the now
famous Williams telephone bill Of Indiana,
sides in Vincennes. and was legislative Repre-
sentative from Knox county. He was born at
Mount Carmel, ILL.,, and is thirty three years of
age, one OF the youngest members of the House
of Representatives. He is a prominent attorney
of this city. How did you come to introduce
the three dollar telephone bill that has raised
such row among the telephone companiesr was
asked
"'Well the power of the Legislature to reeu-
we'll understood, and it was claimed that corpor-
atoms using patented articles could not be regu-
lated by the State, even though they enjoyed
the right of eminent domain. l wanted this
question settled. and believed the Legislature
had full power in the premises. AS the Bell
Telephone Company was recognized as the
meanest Of all nonopolies, thought it proper
subject for the experiment and prepared and
introduced the telephone bill. 1t became the
law. and the Supreme Court has since upheld
the law at every point The question of legis-
lative control is now settled in Indiana in the
way had hoped and expected
did the bill meet with much opposition
WELL should say so. The opposition was
panies threatened everything. They declared
that if we did not withdraw the bill they would
defeat every bill we had any interest in; and
once they did defeat my judicial circuit bill,
judicial circuits of this part of the State-but we
afterwards got the bill through. They attempt
ed schemes of every kind, but the Legislature
was too much for Them
How did it come that they did not attempt
briberyp
"'They did attempt bribery. man was sent
to me to find out my price. He went home on
the next train Bribery was attempted on other
members. The bill came up suddenly one day
and was passed, and think the telephone men
we're anticipated by our sudden movements. We
were too quick for them We had the Bell Tele
phone Company. the Central Union Telephone
Company and the Western Union Telegraph
Company to fight. and their opposition was very
strong
"'What interest had the Western Union in
the matterp
"A financial interest, of course. learned
that the Western Union got 20 per cent. of the
gross earnings of the Bell Telephone Company
THAT is a revelationP
"'Well, it is fact
"'Who are the friends or enemies Of the bill
in the Legislaturep
"'Hon B. Wilson Smith, of Lafayette, was
the strongest opponent in the House, and made
brilliant and pointed speech against the adop-
ton of the bill; but when he came to vote he
voted for the bill, giving as his reason that it
was because of attempts that had been made to
bride some OF the members to vote against it,
AND A nafxu oh oot
him. Hon. j. E. McCulagh, of Gibson county.
one of the leading lawyers Of the State, was
conscientously opposed to it in the Senate.
simply because he thought it was unconstitu
tional: He made strong speech against the
the BILL
:" DO you think the telephone companies will
withdraw from the Statep
lin some localities they may, but I think
they are playing game of bluff. There is
plenty of profit in the business at monthly
rental of three dollars, and if the present com
panies withdraw, other telephone lines will soon
be put up, 80 that Indiana will not be long with
out telephone servic6.'"
Said Mr.. Butler, who is counsel for the Cen
trail Union Telephone Company: There is only
one point in Mr.. Williamss talk that deserves
attention, and that certainly does He speaks
of bribery. If were Mr.. Wallick / would at
the next session Of the Legislature, compel Will
Jams to tell who offered him money. / am GER
tain that no money was offered by the Central
Union Telephone COMPANY to anybody. During
the tendency of the affair said to Mr.. Wallick,
reasoning from certain indications, that if he
would take few thousand dollars the company
might buy their way through We thought we
could see which way the wind lay. told him,
however, that in case he did anything of the
kind that Mcdonald & Butler would have moth
ing further to do with the case. Mr.. Wallick
promptly replied that neither he nor the compa-
ny would offer them copper cent. have moth
ing more to say | think, though, that it is now
time for Mr. Wallick to talk"
The reporter next called on Mr.. Wallick, to
whom the clipping was shown. Mr. Wallck did
not converse readily. 'Mr Butler" said the
reporter, thinks you ought to talk. At any
rate, you can tell me what you said when he re-
marked that he thought few thousand dollars
would defeat the bill"
II said we would not pay q cent" Mr. Walck
stated. mot a continental to any man. Will
iamss statement that the Western Union Tele
graph Company was interested in the bill is up
true With the exception of myself-and my
interest is personal one that of stakeholder
--rot a single Western Union man had anything
to do with the committees or the bill Mr..
Williams says money was offered to him. am
certain the offer did not come from the Central
Union Telephone Company"
II understand" said the reporter, that Mr..
Williamss bill was the result of a disagreement
between him and Mr. johnson, the manager of
the telephone agency at Vincennes; that, in a
heated conversation, one day, Williams told his
creditor that he wonld show him what mem
Der of the Legislature could do for the telephone
monopoly and that he then contrived his bill'
Il have heard rumor of that sort, but know
nothing about it. Mr. Johnson's telephone bust
ness is separate affair from ours, and there is
no connection between U.s. But am not to be
interviewed You must let me off to-day. The
time is not ripe"
Shortly after the reporter met another tele
phone man, who said: $50 Mr. Wallick wouldn't
talk2 He's altogether too cautions. ! wish the
whole truth concerning the telephone legislation
of the last General Assembly could be brought
to light. l have hopes that this will be done.
The integrity of the members was, by common
rumor, given out as exceedingly limber and l
have heard the names of half dozen or more
given out as banded together for piunder 1t is