davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
The daily sentinel., 1899-08-26
UnbuSineSs
Like Treatment
Grand junction, Col.
Aug, 26, 1899.

EDITOR SHNrINBL,
We wish you to publish the following
which we as we'll as over one hundred
shippers pronounce as mean contempt
able method OF working business.
The Rio Grande Express company
have refused to pick up any express
from us unless we agree to give them
our comparative business. They only
claim two thirds of such business. Now
we wish every grower, merchant and
shipper to consider this we'll. You don't
know when you will be placed in the
same position if you ship by the Wells
Fargo company ae you may meet the
same treatment as we have.
We wish to state that We cannot be-
lisve that the management at Denver
would stoop to such unfair and low
methods. Yours truly,
The Abbsy-Hardy Co.
The daily sentinel., 1899-08-26

just received, beautiful line of pictures
etc. Call and see them. Our prices viii
surprise you. The Bargain House.
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20

gate carefully. The Chronicle, under-
stand, sent Mr.. Rathom over to 1olo
County, and he was unable to-from the
charges that the Chronicle had made in
regard to Colonel Burns life there; ana
understand from very intimate frlend OF
Mr.: Ed Leake that Mr.. Leake of The Gan
had written to him ed Leake) in 1olo
asking him TO furnish The Call with any
thing to the detriment of Colonel Burns
that could be found; and heard that Mr..
against Colonel Burns in Yolo County
and that the people were his friends
there. All of those things went to form
my opinion, which had been in doubt.
The chairman-How about that Supreme
Court Judge business?
a. How do you mean, Mr.. Cosper?
q. 1t has been asserted somewhere
do not remember just where-that one or
tn elements that entered into your deter
mining the matter was that you had re-
ceived information that four Judges of
opinion to you that the charges against
Mr. Burns were false, and that his can
didacy was a desirable one.
A. No. | think you misunderstood the
matter, Mr.. Cosper. [ stated in an inter-
view-in my statement-that L had re-
ceived from an authentic source the in
formation that four of the Supreme jus
tees were favorable to Mr.. Burns tor
Senator and The Call did not ask that
question. The Call asked them whether
they had said any such thing to me- The
Call never has asked them the question
whether they are favorable to Mr. Burns
or unfavorable to him. l do not know why
The Call does not do so. 1 imagine they
would get quite different answers from
the ones published, if they did
Mr.. Mellick-Well, Mr.. Wright of course
1t is our business to trace down any ru-
NOR in regard to any candidate.
A. Certainly it is
@. The day that you voted differently
voted to change your vote from Bulla to
Burns, l heard that Colonel Burns had
invited you up to his room and told you
that, if you did not come into his camp
to vote for him, that your whole work as
Speaker would be a failure, and that
therefore you changed.
A. That is absolutely and unqualinedly
untrue Mr.. Mellick.
@. 1 wished only to give you chance to
explain.
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20

The chairman-We Mr.; Colyer, tn NIX
would not further the invesugatloLo OH % for o
anv iunroper methods that are useo iqt
The eIection of United States Senator. ~
wo1,Id he onTv a yindication OF MI. LeahS'
The witness-I might suggest, M;
Chairman. that the extreme delcacy an
the tenderness of The Call at TINS ni ~,
ment is delightful to me. II Is qult tLa az
contravention of the usage "a fHa. FEW
have been applying to me here Ior le"
days past, and | am glaq 70 az that
Mr.. Colver-I want to say turther' t Id
in every charge that has been mace s,ae
against Mr. Wright the dates ana ~, nd tfine
have been given and the parties Hldhiiis
the charge. ,1oasa sit
The chairman-Mr. Colver, please Please in IN
down We cannot permit indulgence III
things of this kind on either sloe, a,,laa
Mr. Colver-If the Speaker can llluUiso
in them, we can as well. ,,;o+,
The chairman-Besq quiet, sir! be qule ~
I say that neither side can indulge IN
these things. any further, nor can ' by
business of the committee be deferred ny
that kind of conduct. Between you anu
Mr.. Wright, anything that you WailL Can
be settled in the way of an interview;
The witness-I might suggest, MI.
Chairman, that we can settle II between
ourselves. 1t ought to be LETT IN thal po-
sition.
The chairman-That is my position ex-
actly.
thing he says, though
The chairman-Wha further has the
committee to do with the examlnatloh OF
Mr.. Wright? If there is nothing, we
will excuse you from the stand. You are
excused, Mr.. Wright.
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20

liked him very much, and knew him
as an honest man; believed he would be
a very good Senator.
@. Did he agree to lend his influence to
Mr.. Grants candidacy?
A. Did he agree to do it? He agreed to
do anything he could, but as he confessed,
he did not see anywhere that he could
O. Did you see any one else in the East
in connection with the candidacy of Mr..
Grant?
A. l saw Mr.. Grants mother
O. Any one else?
A Not that l call to mind now.
O. Do you know of any one else that
went East in the interests of Mr.. Grants
candidacy?
A Not that know of.
@. What did you ask Mr.. Hubbard to do
for Mr. Grants candidacy?
A. Did not ask him to do anything for
It, l asked him not to do anything
against it.
Q. Did he agree to that?
A. He said that they would do nothing
against any one or for any one.
The. chairman-Mr Brown, you haye
stated that your people thought that Mr..
Burns would be the man.
A. We thought so; yes.
c. Against Mr.. Grant?
A. We thought so.
O. How soon did you determine that the
man you would have to fight in this can
idacy was Mr.. Burns? How early in the
campaign?
A. We'll, we always figured that we
would have to fight Mr.. Burns or his in
fluence straight through. Not as an in
dividual of course-as an didividual cam
didate. That was settled when the an
nouncement was made in San Francisco
that ne would be a candidate: but | al
ways thought that he might be one.
O. About what time was the candidacy
of Mr. Burns for the United States Senate
announced in San Francisco?
A. Oh, not but a little while previous to
the convening Of this Legislature, L be-
lieve.
@. Not more than four weeks before the
converting of the Legislature, was it?
A. Not more than four weeks.
O. Well, prior to that time. or at least
UP to two or three weeks before that time,
did you not understand that Mr.. Burns
was friendly to the candidacy of M. H.
de Young?
A. That was common rumor; yes, sir
O. That was your feeling, as one of the
managers for Grant, was it not?
A / figured 1t was either Mr.. de Young
or Mr. Burns, and in either event it would
have been Mr.. Burns strength that he
would have to fight or have to overcome.
Q. You figured against the strength of
Mr.. Burns and not the strength of Mr..
de Young?
A. Well, we figured on both. I don't
think we omitted to figure on anything
that was dangerous.
The chairman-You are excused, Mr..
Brown.
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20

Mr.. Leake?
A. No, sir, never
Q. Anything of that sort?
A. Never
Q. Did you receive any other money in
aid of your candidacy than the money re-
The chairman am not quite clear as
70 whether you have testified that you
told Mr. Leake that you got the $500 of
Mr.. Green.
a. No. have said I had testified that
gid not say to him had received $780,
put the money that you got from Mr..
Green into your candidacy?
A. Yes, sir, had said this that / had
this $3.50 and it was in regard to bust
ness transaction, which L supposed he
understood from the letter in his hand;
money from Mr.. Green" 1 said, YES:
that all went into my campaign but the
amount was never mentioned at all.
q. Oh, I see.
matter is in this testimony tonight.
The chairman-Do you think of any
thing else, gentlemen, you want to in
quire about?
Mr.. Mellick-Going back. Mr.. Wright,
to your getting the original s900-you say
you got $500 and $400-you had the con-
yersation with Mr. Green on the boat;
then afterward you received the money in
person. What was said at the time that
SOu received InlS S0UU ana S4UU IN person,
and from whom did you receive 1t?
A. received it from Mr. Green.
O. And what was said at that time-do
you remember?
A. do not remember Of anything that
was said.
@. If there had been anything said to
bind you to his Senatorial candidacy you
would have?
A I certainly should have remembered
1t, yes, sir.
The chairman-Anything further, gen
tlemen?
Mr.. Lardner-I think Mr.. Leake referred
to one matter that has not been touched
upon; that is, that the organization Of
committees ETC., was withheld till after
he found out how the different members
of the Assembly stood and then organ
lied them according to the wishes of GER
tain prominent candidates, or influences
of that character We're held out or used
against you, or toward you. What can
you say to that matter? I think Mr.
Leake referred to it in his testimony
Mr.. Mellick-I think he only referred to
it in the case of Muenter, and that has
already been answered in regard to Mr..
Wright
The witness-As also have I said in my
testimony tonight, Mr.. Mellick, that I
formed my committees without reference
to Senatorial candidates or corporations.
Mr.. Lardner-I do not know but what
it was referred. to by Mr., Leake-I think
nounced. and then. after the preferences
they were shifted to their detriment.
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20

Mr.. Burnett-What did you go to see
him for?
A. l went to argue with him for Mr.
Grant; told him / thought Mr.. Grant was
a good man. tried to convince him that
he was an available candidate.
9. To secure the support of his paper
for Mr.. Grant?
A; Yes, sir, which he afterward gave
without dollar of compensation or with
out exacting any character of a promise
from Mr.. Grant or from any one else
Q. Well, what propositions were made
to Mr.. Mosier to secure the support of his
paper?
4. What propositions?
A. Simply the arguments that one man
might make to get another to support
9. Well, I understand that you made
trip East?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the interests of Grants cam
paign?
Q. Whom did you go East to see?
A. went East to see. among others
to see that there wasn't any influence
out here brought to bear to defeat Mr..
Grant.
Q, Who did you see in regard to that
matter?
A. Well, went to see General Hubbard,
for one.
9. General Hubbard?
y. what did Mr.. Hubbard Say2
A. What did he say?
Q. Yes.
A. He said the railroad company would
not use any money TO elect any man for
the legislature, or to defeat any man.
=. Mr.. Hubbard said he would take no
part in the canvass of the State?
A. So l understood him.
Q. Well, who else did you see in the
East?
A. In reference to this matter?
.. Yes, in reference to the candidacy.
A. | saw Mr.. Elkns-Senator Elkins.
Q. What did you see Mr.. Elkins for?
A. Well, Mr.. Grant wanted me to go and
see him, and talk to him about the situa-
ton here, and see if he could render him
any assistance anywhere; but he evident
ly could not.
O. What did Mr.. Elkins say?
A. Oh, he talked very friendly of Mr..
Grant-knew him since he was a boy,
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20

A. There never has been any such inter-
view between Colonel Burns and me, nor
mas Colonel Burns ever requested me to
votefor him. | voted upon my own volition
and because believed then, and believe
now that it is the proper thing to do.
me contemporaries your change of
promise, consideration by way of money
or of patronage through Mr. Burns or
any agent of Mr.. Burns?
A. Not in the slightest degree. sir.
Mr.. Lardner-Was your change from
Mr.. Bulla to Mr.. Burns prompted by any
instructions from your district?
Mr.. Mellick-Had you received help
from colonel Burns or the State Central
Committee in getting your nomination?
A. No, sir.
@. How long have you known Colonel
A: 1 have known him since 1887.
Mr.. Devlin-I would like to ask at this
stage, Mr.. CHAIRMAN, are you going to
ask every member Of the Legislature the
reason he voted for a candidate?
The chairman have stated repeatedly
the course this committee follows will be
a matter Of development.
Mr.. Devlin-I think the witness has
fully and fairly answered all of the ques-
tons.
The chairman think he has. I think
it is not to his detriment that he has
Mr.. Devlin-And it puts witness, some
times, in delicate position to speak of
the merits Of different candidates.
Mr.. Mellick-The reason l asked him
specially is because the attorneys for Mr..
Grant and friends of Mr.. Grant seem to
think we are specially directing this in
VeStigation that way.
The witness-I have no objection, gen.
tlemen. l am very glad to answer your
inquiries.
Mr.. Mellick-He has voted for Colonel
Burns, and we want to find out the rea-
sons.
Mr.. Devlin-All right; I have no objec-
ton.
Mr.. Sanford-There is one thing, 1 be-
Heve, Mr.. Wright, that has been over
looked. believe Mr.. Leake said you told
him that you promised your wife never
to vote for Colonel Burns
A. Well, that is untrue.
Q. No such conversation took place?
A. That is untrue We never had anv
such conversation.
The chairman-Will you pass Judgment
on that question, gentlemen?
CIhe chairman hands written ques-
ton to the members of the committee.)
The witness-I shall object of course.
gentlemen, to The Call conducting this
examination.
Mr.. Colver (of The Calp-If you will
pardon me, l will speak for The Call:
It, and I will act as attorney in fact for
the present. The name of the manager
of The Call has been brought into CON
tempt here by the witness, and he has
made the allegation that certain citizens
of sacramento have referred contemptu
ously to the manager of the paper. Now.
sir, he refers to these citizens as promi
and Il tbex is giving them
business men, / think The Call and
Mr.. Leake himself are entitled to know
who these business men are, and the
public as well, in order to judge as to
their character, and as to whether or not
they are competent to besmirch the char
acter of Mr.. Leake.
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20
A. do not remember that testimony.

Q. Was it a fact. or was it not fact?
a, 1t was not fact; not a fact;
The chairman-There is another branch
Of Mr.. Leake's testimony that | would
like to inquire about, Mr.. Wright. Did
you say to Mr.. Leake on Saturday even
posures mentioned by you you would try
to persuade Colonel Burns to get out of
the Senatorial fight?
A. I did not. 1 told Mr.. Leake l was
going to continue to vote for Mr. Burns,
as l have testified in answer to question
you have put here tonight.
.. Did you say to Mr.. Leake in any Of
that conversation that for any consider
alton whatever you would attempt to get
Mr.: Burns to withdraw from the Sena-
torial fight?
grafton of my testimony would ask that
Colonel Burns be subpenaed and asked
whether, at any time, | have requested
him to get out of the fight.
Q. Well that would not prove anything
as to your conversations.
A Well, | did not say SO, Mr.. Cosper.
Mr.. Lardner-I want to understand.
One other question about this man Prin-
gle. Did he receive any money at all
from you?
A. Yes, sir, he did.
q. What was the consideration for that?
How did that happen?
A. The consideration was this: He was
very poor young man; he had been MAX
ing a hard fight in the hope of being
much interested in Mr.. Jordan's cam
paign; Mr.; Jordan himself, after Mr..
Pringle had withdrawn, came to me and
told me of Mr.. Pringle's condition, and 1
said, We'll, if that is the case, Frank,
will help him out. If he has been put to
this expense under the hope that he was
going to be elected why, will return a
portion of it to him. and that informa-
ton was taken to Mr.. Pringle, and later
did give him portion of his expenses.
O. How much?
A. Two hundred and fifty dollars.
.. Was any portion OF that portion of
the Green money?
A. Yes, sir; it was money that 1 had
received from Mr.. Green.
9. That you had received from Green?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mellick-Now, Mr. Wright, will you
tell the reason why, after you voted for
Mr.. Bulla,. you turned and voted for Colo
mel Burns?
A. / voted for Mr.. Bulla because I had
told him year ago that If he were a
candidate and l were ever elected to the
Legislature ] would be very glad to vote
for him. Before the time came for voting
/ went to Mr.. Bulla and said that I was
going to give him a complimentary vote,
and if it developed that he would have
strength enough to win | should be glad
to vote right along for him. Colonel
Burns candidacy, in the meantime, as
have testified here before, was interest
ing me greatly. had been receiving in
formation in regard to the charges that
The Call and the Chronicle had made
against him, and the information l re-
ceived led me to believe that the charges
were false and were untrue. I went to
Mr. Bulla and told him that I was going
to vote for Colonel Burns, and did so.
That is all.
Mr.. Lardner-You had heard those old
charges before, hadn't you, Mr.. Wright?
A Yes, sir. They had been sounded
very much in the newspapers, but hadn't
had a. chance until I came here to investi-
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20
TESTIMONY OF HUGH M. BURKE.

Hugh NJ. Burke. being sworn. testified
as follows:
The chairman-You may state your
name to the committee. Sooi
A. Hugh M. Burke.
.. What is your residence?
A. San Francisco.
Q. And occupation?
A. Newspaper man.
Q. Connected with what newsnanero
A. San Francisco Call
= DO you know Ulysses S. Grant Jr.9
a Yes; l have a slight acquaintance.
=. 10 you know Daniel NJ. Burns?
A Very we'll
Q. Robert n. Bulla?
A. Yes, sir.
9. General w. H. L. Barnes?
A. / do.
Q. George A. Knight?
8. And the other candidates. one and
81 g. befere this Legislature for the United
A. Except Thomas Bard I have not
The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-20
UNFINISHED TESTIMONY
OF HOWARD {. WRIGHT

Following is that portion of the tes-
tinony of Howard E. Wright omitted
last night:
The chairman-Had you in any CONVEX
.sation with Mr.. Leake intimated that you
Daily Kennebec journal., 1899-01-25
COMMITTEE HEARINGS.
JUDICIARY.

The Committee on Judiciary will give
public hearings in its room at the otate
House in Augusta, as follows:
WEDNESDAY, JAN, 25. 1899, at z
tablish a municipal court in the city of
WEDNESDAY. JAN. 25. 1899. at 2
o'clock p. NJ: No. Son an act to estab,
lish the West Washington municipal
court.
"WEDNESDAY. JAN. %, 1899. at 2.So
o'clock p. NJ: No. 5S-On an act to pre-
vent the wearing of spiked boots or
shoes in hotels or other public places.
WEDNESDAY,. JAN. 25,, 1899, at go
vide for the care and protection of burial
grounds.
WEDNESDAY. JAN. 25, 1899, at go
o'clock +. M: No. 6i--On an act author
iZing Il guardian to carry out the powers
of his ward in certain cases.
WEDNESDAY, JAN 25. 1899, at 23r
O'Clock p. NJ: No. 60-On an act in rela-
ton to IN sshool district of the city OF
THURSDAY. JAN. -. 1s9a at 2.s(
S. Williamson and others for suitable
homeopathic treatment at the Eastern
Maine Insane Hospital.
TUESDAY, JAN. 81, 1899, at go O'Clock
=. M.--No. 16. On an act to authorize the
Skowhegan Electric Light Company 70
issue bonds.
TUESDAY. JAN 81. 1899, at go O'Clock
r. M: No. .a-On a resolve in favor ol
York Deeds.
TUESDAY. JAN. 81 1899. at 80 O'Clock
+. NJ: No. Son an act To author. .Ze thf
construction of n dam at the Mill Pond
at New Rarbor. in Bristol
WEDNESDAY. FEB l. 1899, at ey
CLOCK +. M. No. Sion an act relating
teryille.
Daily Kennebec journal., 1899-01-25
STANDING com Ml11eEs OF THE HOUSE.

ON WAYS AND MEANS.-Plumnner Of
Portland. Jordan of Lisbon. Bodwell OF
Hallowell. Britton of Bucksport. Kervon
0fsSanford. Webb of Portland, O'Brien Of
Thomaston.
ON LEAVE OF ABsENcE.-wilson d
Brunswick. Plummer of Portland. Befs9
Of Denmark. Wood Of Camden, Girdler Of
Mercer. Spofford of New Sharon. Teel Of
St. George. SO
ON BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE,
PMlbrook Of Waterville, Chase OF Port
land, Belleau of Lewiston. E:Ls
ON BILLS IN THE THIRD READ.
lNG.-Chamberlain of Lebanon, Fits 0t
Durham, Smith of Hartland, Libby OF
Albion, Hill of Belfast, Teel Of St. George.
Merrill of New Gloucester.
ON ENGROSSED BILLS-Powers OF
Fl: Fairfield. Webster of Chestsryiiie.
Purinton Of Woolwich, Sawyer Of Ln.
ington. Pierce of Blaine, Morey OF Lewt'
ton, Brown OF Warren. 81
ON ECTIONS.-Hopkins OF Deertns'
McFadden Of Dresden. Gordon Of Reao-
field, Taylor of Hope. Sargent OF SedE
wick. O'Brien of Thomaston, Belleau
Lewiston.
ON COUNTY ESTIMATES.-Harris Q!
Auburn. Cleveland of Houlton, Staples o.
Bridgton. Webster of Chesterville. Somsss
of Mt. Desert. Maxcy of Gardiner, Hix q
Rockland. Peaslee of Wiscasset, kiloots
of Bethel, Beal of Bangor. Guernsey o.
Dover. Ledyard of Bath. Merrill OF Sko.w'
hegan, Hill OF Belfast, McFaul Of ~
chias, KernOn of Sanford.
Daily Kennebec journal., 1899-01-25
,N,..>n r,s,,rn,Es Ann GAME.

WEDN ESDAY. JAN. %, at 80 - NJ
on bin an act for the protection OF iish IN
the tributaries of Moosehead Lake.
WEDNESDAY. JAN. p, ATTN at ~ r. =, M:h asn
in the West OA,.et of Moosehead Lake
WEDNESDAY. JAN. Is. at go II Nj
On petitions of Chas. j.. Brown anu otn-
ers, and w. =. Greenlaw ana otners. f -, ~ 10
be allowed to take ana tramspGh.' nnp,hs nf % Iniy
and August. from East Machias ri'e'' "s
lakes and tributaries.
WEDNESDAY. JAN. %. at ~ +; M
An act to secure the better proteC.lo" ~
inland fish and game. by regulating the me
registration of guides and providing ior
properly trained guides, ooop M
WEDNESDAY, IAN; .; az ~; z;% one Inn
dred others Of Biddeford. asking Tor the
protection of deer in York county.
WEDNESDAY,, JAN. %. at 30 +. NJ
On order for protecting deer in tnat part
of oxford county, lying south OF the All
drOScOggin river
WEDNESDAY. JAN. 25. at go p; M
On order in, regard to expedieney OF con-
timing close time on deer i'm YORK, CUM
berand and Sagadahoc counties.
WEDNESDAY. JAN: 25 on petition OF
Nathaniel Hobbs and - DINERS. Wt 20 onsntv Hn,S""
WEDNESDAY, FEB. /, on an act TO
nrovide for a State hunting license. and
10 obtain revenue for the pfo1ect'oh Oh
moose, ueeF anu
WEDNESDAY. FEB. I, on an act to
nrotect tern i'm the county of YORK.
! WEDNESDAY. FEB. /, on resolve to
ra-siork with smelts the brooks tributary
in p/nobscot river between Inc noftn ana
south line of the town of Winterport.
WEDNESDAY, FEB. lon petition of
Jacob Witham and "a others. asking that
the law prohibiting the trapping ana
killing of beaver be repealed.
WEDNESDAY. FEB. 1.-On bill an act
to repeal so much of section of chapter
70 of the Revised Statutes as relates TO
the bounty on pears.
WEDNESDAY. FEB. lon petition Of
j.. NJ. Blanchard and 2l2 Others, to elect
fish and game WardenS.
WEDNESDAY, FEB. lon petition of
]. W. Bracket and 1G others, for the
pagation and protection of fish ana
game in Luftern pond in town OF Phii-
lips.
WEDNESDAY, FEB. Son bill An
Act TO permit the breeding of quail in the
town of Sullivan.
WEDNESDAY. FEB. Son order that
the committee on inland fisheries and
game be instructed TO consider the feas-
ib!ity of legislation against hunting part
ridges with dogs.
WEDNESDAY. FEB. Son petition of
NJ. Z. Oakes and 30 others. for protec-
ton of pickere in Grassy Pond.
WEDNESDAY. FEB. Son communi-
cation of f. S. Bowden, asking for pro-
lection of salmon in Crystal Lake.
WEDNESDAY. FEB. Son an act for
the protection Of fish in Littlefeld's Pond,
in Sanford, in the county of York.
WEDNESDAY. FEB. Son petition of
H. A Furbush and l09 others, to prohibit
bait fishing in the Seven Ponds in Frank
lin county.
Per order committee.
j. r. WEED IT, Secretary.