New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-10-25
MR. NICOLL DENIES IT.
HE SAYS THAT HE HAS MADB NO Coz1UPT
BARGAIN.

HE SAYS THAT he HAS MADB NO ooz1UPT
BARGAIN.
THE LIQUOR DEALERS DID CALL on H1N, new:
EvER-THEY ADMIT THAT THEY ExPDof
10 BENEF1T By TAM
MANY VICTORY.
The statement published yesterday that Tan
many Hall was alleged to have entered into
corrupt bargain with the Liquor Dealers 49,
citation Of New-York, by which In return for the
liquor vote in behalf Of the Tammany ticket Tam
many Hall was pledged to protect, through III
ofice-holders, but especially through the District
Attorneys Office the interests Of the hquor-deaerA
created profound sensation throughout the city
According to this statement, committee Of the
association appointed to confer with Mr.. NicolL
the Tammany candidate for District-Attorney, ~
ported to that body at q meeting held on October
IA, four days after the Tammany ticket wa
nominated, that Mr.. Nicoll could be relied upon
to protect the rum-deaers," which could only
mean that Mr. Nicoll had promised that violations
Of the Excise law should be ignored during his
incumbency of the office. To this report Of the
committee the statement was added that Mr..
Nicoll had agreed that exJudge Cunning s. Bed
ford should be retained as Assistant District-At
torney In charge Of the excise cases, and that
there should be no Indictment or prosecution Of
hquor-dealers. BY this report both Mr.. Croker,
the leader Of Tammany Hall. and Mr.. Nicoll, its
candidate for DistrctAttorney, were made to op-
pear as having entered into the compact with tho
liauor-dealers. There seems to be little doubt
that this Is the understanding that the liquor men
A. AhoA
they have begun the fuflment Of their side Of 10
by ON active support Of the Tammany Hall ticket
and by generous contributions to Tsmmany's cam
paign fund. In reply to this charge Mr.. Nicoll
yesterday issued the following card Of denial
Of this morning. to the effect that have made
bargain entered into any understanding. expressed
In inaon n'' or Of votes. that would elected grant
persons licensed to sell liquors in this city Immunity
taH ons as an ASSISTANT 70 po:O
In the Office of Attorney, In consideration OF
his support or the support OF any one sse or as
in the DistrictAttOrney's ONCE. Is PROFESSIONALLY
agreement. i have made absolutely no pledges nor
promises Of any kind " sy ,mss or as 10 &
method Of administering the duties OF the DistrctAt
cncy's office ever been demanded OF me Dy any one.
am capable OF making any such pledge or promise or
any pledge promise whatever Is false ana malicious.
To o Tribune reporter who saw Mr.. Nicou at
his campaign headquarters yesterday he said thai
the only truth there was in the whole story was
the fact that he did see the committee at the
office of their counsel. Donohue, Newcombe &c
Cardozo, and that he had an interview with its
members. lie said
"On the day in question had some business
of a legal nature with Richard S. Newcornoe. OF
the firm of Donohuc, Newcombe Cardoso. When
/ reached his Office, at No. 96 Broadway. Mr..
Newcombe told me that Q committee OF tho
LIQUOR Dealers Association was there. and that
they were then on their way ta~ny samees Ior
the purpose Of comforting with me. Re gave
me to understand that there was q prejudice
against me among liquor men, which 1t would
be for INV interest as o candidate to remove
T said that there was no cause for any such
preiudice but that if the committee wanted to
see me | would see them then and there. was
accordingly introduced to the several members
of the committee, and held brief conversation
with them Not word was said at this time
or at any other about protecting their inter-
csts
The committee complained that the liquor
men had been subjected to blackmail, and told
them that l would permit nothing in tho
shape of blackmail during my term OF office II
elected Referring to the prejudices which mad
heard Of and which were supposed to have some
relation TO my reputation as Assistant Dstrlct-
Attorney told my visitors that none except law
breakers need have any fears as to the manner ln
which | should discharge the duties OF the once.
Theirs. | said was a lawful business, recognized
as such by the courts and the law, ana that 70
long as they obeyed and respected the law uhoei
| which they were licensed / should treat them as
L. ol,t l;nn
hrole the law. l should Ike obliged to act accord.
ingly.
"Ncitbcr Mr.. Croker nor any person acting for
him has ever made the slightest request or onered
any suggestion as TO any appointment may have
IN max or as to the manner Of my conducting the
business Of the office for which am candidate.
have mover made nor have / been asked to
mako n solitary pledge in connection with my
nomination or election.
Mr. Nicoll added that he had been informed
that his opponent, Mr. Goff was himself engaged
in pursung the louor-dealers, but not with hostile
;,tcnt He ha, been going for their votes.
hove bccn informed" continued Mr.. Nicou, that
be ia Offering better Inducements to them thah
could il I were SD disposed. | was shown letter
Of Mr. GoGs to-day, addressed to lhlro-a'e'
Iiouor- dealer asking him and his frlends 10 come
10 Mr.. Goff headquarters. 1 am toiu tha' ho
has sent similar letters to many other deaien III
liquor in Ncw-iork."
Mr. Nicoll said that he did not have the letter
referred 10 in his possession. but that he was
sure that it could he produced. As to Cunning 5.
Bedford and his alleged purpose to continue him
il elected. Mr. Nicoll said that the report had no
foundation whatever
It will be observed that Mr.. Nicoll in his card.
speaks of the report Of the alleged bargain e =
The Tribune were responsible for its truth. !ho
is not the fact. The Tribune has merely gwen
the statement with the evidence upon which II
rests. and has left the public to Judge OF in
credibility.
Mr. Croker was found at Tammany Hall. and his
attention having been called to the statement, also
mt in n general denial about as follows: