The advocate., 1897-04-14
Topeka, KANSAS, APRIL IA, 1897.


House required q two,thirds vote to
advance o bill. Being told that chat was
the case, Wilson then offered him 81 900
to apply the rule against the school book
bill and $500 if the bill was defeated.
He placed Sl00 in Streets lap, which the
latter declined to take Street then
left, but received several notes from
Wilson, the last of which he answered by
saying that be could do nothing for him.
He had received several anonymous
letters, among which was one similar to
the one received by FaiTchild. He said
that much had been said of the mistakes
Of this Legislature and in such way as
to lead to the belief that no such errors
had occurred before. He called attention
to the fact that the Appellate court bill
passed in 1895 was found to be 80 defec-
tive that new bill was rushed through
before the session closed. He concluded
by asserting that the employees OF the last
Legislature we're as competent and honor.
able as any Kansas Legislature ever had.
Senator Titus then testified in regard
to the attempt Of Boyd to bribe him.
His statement was substantially the
same as that published in the ADVOCATE
at the time. He had been approached
with a proposition to defeat the school
book bill by the passage of a new bill, a
copy OF which was filed by the witness
with the committee. 1t provided for
county uniformity, exempting cities Of
the first class unless they chose to Join
the counties in adopting uniformity. The
proposition had been made by L. d.
Lewelling, who told him that there
would be something in it for Titus and
for himself, and that as the bill would
suit the people they might as we'll make
something out of it.
Representative Dingus Pop of Linn
was then called. He said that Repre-
sentative Doyle free silver Rep. told
him that if he (Dipgus) had not gone so
far in his fight for the school book bill
that he might have gotten something,
and that he thought that he could get
him 5000 anyway. This was to be in
consideration Of bis support of an
amendment exempting cities of the first
class from the provisions Of the BILL
Smith of Sherman appeared and asked
for hearing. He said that the greater
part of ClRrk's testimony was utterly
fs'se. He said that Clark had referred
to the railroad bill in conversation with
him first. He had told Clark that he
would oppose the bill because a majority
of the voters of his district were railroad
and that they thought that the
Brown bill would reduce their wages,
and that he was therefore opposed to
the bill. Clark told him that he had
loaned his Missouri Pacific pass to
friend and that it had been taken up
and he wanted Smith to help him get it
restored He testified that Clark asked
him If he did not believe that there was
IN it to vote against the
Brown bill. He replied that he did not
know, as he was opposed to it because
his constituents we're. Mrs. Nellie Ben
nett, clerk Of Smiths committee, corrob-
grated a great deal of Smiths testimony,
stating that she had overheard the con-
with Clark.
On Saturday Mr.. Clark again took the |
stand. He repeated his previous state
ments. He admitted the pass story, and |
said he had loaned it so that Gilbert
could go and see his sick mother. He
testified that Mrs. Bennett was not pres.
mt when he had his conversation with
Smith. Gilbert was present and testified
ls to the pass matter Mrs. Bennett was
recalled and repeated without change
;he statements previously made.
The investigation will continue this
week. In the next issue of the ADvo
ATE moro detailed report Of the pro-
,eedings viii be given, !