The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1888-10-10
WHITE GAMBLED IN GRAIN
AND souEALED WHEN SQUEEZED.
The Fort Wayne Congressman's Record as
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES All Profits,
but ''Lying Down" When the Deal
Went Sainst Him.

Fort WAYNE, Oct. Especial. Rep
resentative ]. B. White, although not
born great or had greatness thrust upon
him, has immortalized himself in the ma
tional congress as statesman, whose
name will go down in history as the
parliamentarian who offered resolution
to suspend a part OF the U. s.
constitution during the balance of Presi-
dent Cleveland's first term, and who in
troduced bill to regulate the wages of
female women"
These two masterpieces of statesman
ship will be preserved for the benefit of
future generations in the Congressional
Record, and in Ii. r. bill IL. l02, sec. 4,
line l, respectively.
But there is another chapter of the cap
tain's life, also recorded in one of Uncle
Sans books, which is of more interest to
the present generation, especially to the
voters of the Twelfth district, than to pos
terity.
This bitof Mr.. Whites history, which the
reader can find in U. S. Rep, No. 123, p.
500, should have been appended as a sup
plement to a speech the captain delivered
in congress- or got '1eave to print" in the
Record of July Ia speech which he Is
distributing freely among his constitu-
ents, and in which the following remark
able scathing denunciation of the Chicago
grain spectators appears:
Gambling in them wheat corn, oats and
pork is the runiation of the prices, and until
that is checked or stopped the farmers prop
erty in these respects will be at their mercy,
and the farmer kept in state of almost
dependence on moneyed men IN consequence
of low prices being fixed on their products by
the gamblers in Chicago. This also congress
can remedy, etc.
Who Are the Chicago Gamblers?
Capt. ]. B. White, representative of the
Twelfth district by virtue of democratic
discord, upon oath in court, says that he
is one of them himself.
Swears that during the years of 70, 80,
81 and 'S2 he gambled in "ghedt, corn, oats
aud pork" to the amount s., 135,000!
Swears before the highest tribunal of
the nation that not one dollar of his board
OF trade transactions represents legitimate
business, but that he meant simply to do
a gambling gambling, which he
now tells the voters is the ruinatlOn OF
the farm products and places the farmers
az the dependence of the same gamblers
while the captain swears he himself is
one OF the gang.
Following is the history of the case and
Capt. Whites Self-dccusdtion Of gambling,
backed with his own sworn testimony:
For some years prior to 1888, Capt.
White had been engaged, as he states, in
gambling or the Chicago board of trade,
and had put into the hands of his broker
large sums of money to cover margins. In
July, 1882, there was "corner" on wheat,
and the captain lost about S12, 900 on a one
hundred-thousand bushel wheat deal. He
ri hro 70 ha
margins, and brought an action against
him to recover the $4,000.
He was beaten below and appealed to
the supreme court of the United States.
The case was decided in that court on the
5th day of December. 1887, and by the
title of James B. White VS.. George NJ
Barber" and reported in full in 125, U. S.
rep, p. 392. The evidence in the case was
taken in full to the supreme court. Mr..
Justice Blatchford, in the decision of the
case, made a statement of the evidence.
With an unlmportant omission, indi-
Gated by stars, he gives in full the testi-
mony OF Capt. White. As stated from the
record by Justice Blatchford, James b.
White. the plaintiff, testified that now
and during the time in question he re-
sided at Fort Wayne, Ind, engaged in the
business OF dealing in general merchan-
disc; that in 1879, and prior thereto, one
A. S. Mailman OF Chicago acted as his
agent in purchasing and forwarding mer-
chandise of various kinds.
Capt. whites Testimony.
"That about Sept, 1879, desiring to do
some trading on the board of trade in
Chicago, | asked Mailman TO recommend
some good responsible broker on the board
of trade, through whom / could do bust
hot Mo1t Ia1 tha 10
PENDANT, who then, and during the
time in question, was broker residing
in Chicago and doing business on the
board of trade; that thereupon l COM
menced trading on the board, sending my
orders at first to Mailman, who commune
Gated them to the defendant; that about
Dec, 1879, came 10 Chicago, made the
acquaintance of the defendant, and there
after did business directly with him that
i continued TO do business with defendant
during the years 1879, 1880, 1881 and 1882
buying and selling on the board,
through the defendant as broker, corn
wheat, oats, pork and other
commodities; and that about April 49,
1852. had a settlement with defendant
in which all previous dealings were adj
lusted; that up to this time the transac-
tons which | had made through defend
ant on the board amounted 10 SlOO,DOO IN
1879, S1,7lS,000 in 1880, S640,000 in 1881
and $4,000 in 1892 that in November
or December, 1879, and at other times
prior to the settlement in April, 1882,
had a conversation with the defendant, in
which / told the defendant that | was a
merchant in Fort Wayne, and did not
want it known that was engaged in spec
ulating on the board of trade in Chicago,
as it might affect my credit, and that
the account could be kept in the
name of A s. Mailman; that l
considered it hazardous bust
ness, but was willing to gamble, provided
could have fair show; that / wanted
my deals placed with responsible parties
so that | could get my money when |
made it; that / didn't want any. of the
property, but meant simply to do a
gambling business; that the defendant
told me (plaintiff1 that he knew what |
wanted; that Mailman had explained my
situation and business that he would deal
only with responsible parties and the
deals should be settled so as to get the
profits or losses; that defendant told me
(plaintiff) that not one bushel in a million
that was bought and sold on the board
was legitimate business that few of the
large houses did some legitimate bust
ness, but most Of it was simply trading in
differences; that he (defendant)
did nothing but business of