The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1892-10-22
SWINDLED.
Prisoners Seeking Pardons and Pa
roles Are the Victims.
Unprlncipied Lawyers Are the vultures-
An Attempt to Bride the Pardon
Board Itself-The Matter to BE
Thoroughly Investigated.

CINCINNATI, Oct. 15-The Columbus
(O) correspondent of the Enquirer
telegraph to that paper as follows: The
state board of pardons has been con-
ducting an investigation for several
weeks which results in some startling
disclosures. Sytematic swindling oper-
ations, perpetrated by numerous attor-
neys at the expense of convicts in the
penitentiary, have been going on for a
long time. Prisoners seeking pardons
and paroles are the victims. While the
wholesale frauds which have been prac-
ticed are made possible by the present
pardon and parole system, the pardon
board in this instance is blameless.
Complaints have been made for long
time by certain prisoners of the tardi-
ness with which their applications were
treated by the pardon board. Investi-
cation developed the fact that these
cases had not been presented to the
board at all, although the applicants
had employed attorneys to push their
claims. This led the board to believe
that crooked work was being done by
attorneys, and further inquiry places
some lawyers of previous high standing
in very unenviable light Among the
cases in which the board learned that
fraud had beel practiced were several
of some note in criminal circles.
Emil Trumpeter, Cincinnati life
man, sent up soon after the riots for
murder in the second degree, is one of
the victims He was approached a few
weeks ago by an ex-penitentiary official
and told that pardon could be pro-
cured for him if he would furnish $50
expenses. Trumpeter paid the $50, and
that is the last he ever heard of the
man who received the money. The case
already had been rejected before the
ex-prison official offered to secure the
pardon, and the latter knew it was q
hopeless case.
A Miami county convict named Flem-
ing is another one of those swindled.
He employed a young attorney of this
city to draw up the application for par
don and also history of the crime.
The attorney also agreed to present the
case to the pardon board. For his serv-
ices he was to receive $50. After the
attorney had drawn up the papers he
demanded $50 more before he would
present them to the board. Fleming
did not have the money, and the papers
were never presented.
j. p. Mccartney, prisoner from
Toledo, who is serving two sentences
for forgery. was caught for $265. His
was a hopeless case, and his attorney
never made an earnest effort to have
him pardoned. Mccartney has rel
atives of some wealth, however, and
the lawyer worked them for all he
could get, making varioNs pretenses to
extract the money.
A Cleveland lady paid an attorney of
this city $50 to procure pardon for her
brother. The attorney pocleted the
money and never even presented an
application.
The most sensational discovery made
by the board was an attempt to bribe
its members, They learned that Co.
lumbus attorney of high standing a few
weeks ago induced the wife of pris-
oner to pay him 500, which he said was
to be used in buying the votes of GER
tain members of the board. The attor-
ney took the money and gave the case
no further attention. Indications of
crookedness have been discovered in
several other cases, and the investiga-
ton will be continued.