People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1895-06-20
CONVICTED!
The Political Fixers OF Sumner COUNTY
Found Guilty Of Making a Corrupt
Deal to Secure Their Election.

1hS Jul III thS SoSS Va N"ii pun
& Hood VS.. Sumner county brought
in a verdict for the defendant Friday
morning. This seals the charges Of
corruption heretofore made in these
columns.
Judge Brunette in his Instructions,
told the jury that the contract was
assignable and no other ground was
left for a verdict for the defendant
except that of fraud as alleged in the
answer of the defendant as published
in the VOICE. The evidence on this
score was not as explicit as it might
have been, by reason Of the fear of
criminal prosecution, but the jury
deemed it sufficient to make a find
ing of fraud upon. The judge had
instructed them that if they found
fraud had been practiced in secur-
ing the contract they would be justi-
fed in holding the contract invalid.
John 7. Stewards evidence was
about as follows: He first talked
with Commissioner Faurot about the
matter at the Arlington hotel in
August, 1898; told him that the
Standard had concluded to give the
straight Democratic ticket vigorous
support; that the Populists had not
shown any favorS to the Democrats
and that he was in favor of demon
strating their power in this campaign.
Mr.. Faurot was greatly pleased and
said if the Standard pursued that
course it would not regret it. Stew
art told him that there was only one
way he could help the Standard and
that was by giving it the county
printing. Faurot replied that he
could only say that eff the Standard
pursued this course it would rot re.
greet it" (The reader can read be.
tween the lines here as the jury
doubtless did, Stewart said the,
talked about it again at the October
session of the board, at which time
he called Faurot's attention TO tn,
fact that the Standard was Carrying
out its part of the deal. Faurot wa.
pleased and reiterated his forme,
remark that the Standard "woulc
not regret it" They again talked
about it after the election at which
time Faurot gave renewed assurance
Stewart maintained, however, tina
there was no definite promise-only
a surmise.
Geo. 7. Pitts, who was chairman
OF the Democratic central committe,
testified to nothing definite excep
that he urged this course on thu
part of the Standard, knowing of tn,
talk Faurot had had with Stewart
He said that the Standard would
have supported the Democratic
ticket anyway, but perhaps not Sc
vigorously.
The VOICE does not know why W
], Newbold and others were not pu
upon the stand, unless because o
the fear that their memories would
prove so bad as to work. a damage
to the case.
1t was evident from the start tina
the "push" about the court house
was favorable to the plaintiffs. 1
would never do to have the part,
convicted Of dealing with the Demo
Gratis in order to defeat the Populists
They would much rather see tn,
county pay the printing bill tn,
second time than to have this fac
established. Then there was tn,
fear Of criminal prosecution and tn,
forfeiture of their Offices staring then
in the face. 1t was conceded on al
sides and boosted that the judges in
structicns were partial to the plain
tiffs. He held the contract assign
able. Attorney General Littl,
thought otherwise. There are man,
who thought, and still think, Judg,
Brunette should have stood asid,
and allowed this case, which PLAYED
such an interesting part in his owl
election, to be tried before a judg,
pro TEN. But not he.
The prelude to Mr.. Stewards test
mony would have read about lik'