The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-08-17

Il
1887 another party and myself had the con-
the contract was finished Judge Hord or
dered the courtroom revarnished. but
there was never any trouble about that.
We had a little racket about the bill on the
courthouse"
THAT TELEPHONE JOB.
Now. i come to the telephone story.
That's id lie. All about my achieving
success as q lobbyist In the Legislature. |
was never interested in bill in the last
Legislature and never spoke to o member
about bill"
Didn't you visit the telephone peoplep
THAT man Hackett, the superintendent.
came TO me In my room at the Bates House
during the winter of 1885. L never saw him
before. but q friend in Shelbyville who
knew him told him to come TO me. This
telephone bill was pending In the Legis-
lature. and he wanted to talk to mo about
it. He asked me If / could be of any as
eistance TO him. l told him l didn't know
whether could be or not. In a few days
he wanted TO see me again. l got two or
three kilograms from Beach, and at last
one asking me to come to Chicago / went
there. Beach talked to me abont the Will
Jams bill; wanted to. suppress il;
wanted to know If there was any
chance to use any money in the
Indiana Legislature. Asked me if had
q list of the members. had one printed
by Burford, and showed it to- him. Ii was
John +. Sullivan, the clerk of Marion
county, who led the fight on that bill.
Beach's conversation was as TO whether
the telephone company could come down
here with money and prevent it's passage.
Asked if / would help them beat 1t.
told him yes. He said he would come the
next week, but be didn't come. Sullivan,
aided by the Indianapolis newspapers.
paased the bill. 1t was Bellamy sutton who
referred Hackett to NO."
How about your being mixed MP with
the Miller farm business when that was
proposed for the fair grOundF This in
cluded reference TO the attempt to bride
certain members OF the executive commit
tee of the State Board of Agriculture.
Whoever said / was mixed up in the
fair on ound businessf The man LOckhart
never said was. / never advocated the
selection of the Miller farm. No man ever
cent journalism. You folks have gone too
far with me. YOu could no more prove any
of that stuff than you could fly to heaven"
There at least would be q merry tine if
you and Bell sutton and some of those fell
lows were put on the witness stand"
Pm not saying anything about Bell
Sutton, or Lockhart, or any body else. You
never got hold of the right fellows in that
State Playground business. Pve often
laughed about that"
WHATS the reason you can't give the
story up now, Rayf The public is inter-
ested In IL yet"
There's nothing to give. 1t isn't fair to
put that on me. Lockhart never said so to
nybody. 1t was only jumped at by the
Indianapolis newspapers"
ME-. Ray said that giving money to the
commissioners in the Miller farm matter
cOnld not be bribery. why" said he.
they are not State officers. 1t is simply
private corporation"
There's another thing here in this
paper. It's the Shelby county case. Judge
Hackney went before the grand jury per-
sonally. They sent for him. He was very
severe. and instructed tho grand jury to IN
vestigate the whole subject, indict any,
body who had violated any law. McNutt,
the prosecutor at Franklin. was sent for TO
come and conduct the matter. Ii was on
for SIX or seven weeks. No evidence was
base any kind of an indictment. They had
every trustee In the county there. and men
from different parts of the State. There
was nothing to indict me for"
why didn't they try you on obtaining
money under false DretensesW
IL don't sec howwou could make such q
case. Then the men to whom sold the pa
per wrote to the trustees out all about il
before they bought 1t. The paper spoke for
itself. The cut you published stipulates
Wuoe ~ 40 AOAs lucy oit Soo koOu uisCOuut
for buying 1t. Thompson, at Edinburg,
took off so or 35 per cent"
1T was something like the green-goods
scheme, wasn't itp
rs. p. Kennedy, at Liberty. wonld take
Oft 20 or 30 per cent, owing to the time that
it run. They never bought on any repre-.
sensations from me-always wrote to the
trustessn <
Thus Ray Is given the benefit of his full
denial. Much OF it his interlocutor did
not know anything more about fthan the
fact that it had been brought from Shelby.
willie by q competent representative of this
paper. aud as to much moro of 1t he irankly
told Ray he did not believe him..
It will be noted that while his denial:
are numerous as to minor details, he prac.
tioally admits the main points as to selline
the stuff at the figures named, as to hi.
Willingness to help the telephone company
10 it's desire to use money In the Legisla
tuFe. as to drawing revolvers upon Mont.
gomery and DObbins, as to his indictment
in Randolph county and as to bis arres,
upon criminal proceedings in Union
county. There may be- and. doubtless. are
inaccuracies In the account published Sat
urday; for instance. the statement thai
certain trustees gave 1t in evidence thai
some of the Ray warrants had forged sigma
lures. This was not In evidence, vet If Ray
is particularly anxious about it, evidence
can be produced that some of the warrant.
bore forged signatures.