The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1896-02-09

too much and he could not pay IT, 1
said they had taken $500 or $500 worth
of liquors. He said it was not worth
over $40, that the wine was only worth
6 cents bottle. / then talked with the
officers and then told him that L would
dismiss the cases if he would pay me SoO
and agree TO a perpetual injunction and
he agree TO quit the business. He said
he did not care for the injunction and
it could stand 1 said 1 would have 70
push the case some time and il the
liquor case was settled my fees would
only be s25 and he give me a check for
that amount and paid Judge Tucker
the costs.
Il was to meet him after that at noon
at the police court and L did not ger
there in time and when l went TO the
Office I met him on the stairs and We
went back into the Office and ne said
he wanted to settle up that injunction
case and he gave me another check Tor
S25. He then spoke again about settling
Johns case. He said he had boxed PIP
his goods and did not intend 10 sell
any more liquor here unless this thing
blew over Heron said the injunction
would do me no good as they had quit
the business. I was willing 70 let the
injunction go so that if ne commenced
again l should commence on him
again. l wanted to convince the joint
lists that when they agreed 10 quit they
had to do II. l instructed Chief Bur
rows if necessary 10 put man TO
watch Heron entirely to see that he
kept his agreement. He then told me
he would talk about Johns case. / told
him TO come to police headquarters the
next day at noon. He came 10 my Of
flee the next day and said here is $50 1
have let John have to settle his case. I
said it is not enough. that the costs
were over $50 and they must confess a
perpetual injunction and pay me my
fee in the case. John then said if the
injunction goes he did not want 10 set
tie it. 1 told them if they intended TO
settle that way and go on in business
again that they could no do it. That
my object was to close the liquor bust
ness in Wichita.
There was this difference in the two
cases so far as the injunctiOnS. l had
service on the owner Of the building
where John was running and I did not
in the case Of Pat Heron. Johns place
was an old land mark and 1 wanted to
close it. I had no notion Of giving up
the injunction in that case. We could
not agree and there was nothing done.
I'm the case Of Ernest Harris 1 think
did agree TO dismiss 1t If he would pay
a fee in the Injunction case if he would
pay me SO. He said he could not pay il.
He took out some silver and said there
IS all / have, and then I agreed to take
$40. He did not have that much and 1
finally let him off for $25 and told him TO
quit and pay me So now and the other
$13 when he made it al Cripple Greek.
where he was going.
In the SimOns case when the war
rant was first issued he was not arrest
ed. Eckstein afterward told me that
Simons wanted to go to st. Louis and
asked me how he could get off. I told
him he could get off by paying the at
tOrney fee and costs in the case. l told
Simons' father that he did not need to
pay a cent; that Schnitzler would pay
it. l so stated in the motion my rea-
sons for dsmissing the case and it was
approved by the court.
John Heron did not count the money
out on my knee as he stated. He ran
his hand In his pocket and may have
taken out the money, but ! am as GER
tain as that I exist that he did not
count the money on my knee"
In response to another question put
to him by Colonel Dyer, Mr.. Campbell
said: Il have practiced law since 1866.
assistant attorney general. Was once
city attorney. It is my judgment as
lawyer that L had a right to do just
what did do. l knew it was a mooted
question and wrote the attorney general
for an opinion and he gave me instruc-
tiOnS what to do in such cases"
Here Colonel Dyer produced a letter
written by Judge Campbell 10 Attorney
General Dawes. asking him for advice
as to whether he might dismiss cases If
jointist would promise TO go out of the
business. Five days afterwards he re-
ceiVed a reply from Dawes advising
him to dismiss cases on a promise 10
quit, by the jointists. Also advising
him TO collect the costs and reasonable
attorney fees and to record all these
facts in the journal entry of the court.
Continuing Judge Campbell said: In
all these proceedings il was my opin-
ion that was the best way to suppress
the liquor business. was aware of the
fact that that kind of a system had pre-
vailed here. 1t was not my desire 70
get these men in jail, but 10 set them TO
quit the business"
Judge Campbell was crossed question
ed by Judge Sankey.
He said that he did not at first COM
mence injunction proceedings. He was
not at first onto that. He depended on
getting evidence in the police court 10
sustain the injunction cases. L talked
of this case of Taylor and Hibbitts with
the police officers. They told me that
they wanted TO quit. l gave them to
understand that 1 would not be hard on
liquor men if they would quit the bust
ness"
He said that he paid no part Of the
money 10 Attorney General Dawes. He
said he gave back Pat Herron's liquor
because he had no use for them, didn't
care to destroy them and on the promise
of Pat that he would ship them 70 Col
orado. He didn't care what they did
with them there and that they only cost
cents a bottle any way. He thought
there were several joints still in Wich-
tia but none Of them open 50 that every
body could get in them. He said he