The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-02-01
a RECORD OF BRIBERY.

N the case of Ball vs. Putnam ct al appealed from
the Yolo County Superior Court year ago,
the Supreme Court the other day handed down a
decision which possesses than ordinary interest
at the present time: Indeed it is especially apple
able to condition which often prevails at Sacra-
mento, involving it does the corruption OF
tire Legislature by an entire community.
In 1850 the people of Willows, Colusa County, con-
ceived the idea that they could attain to the dignity
of metropolis by dividing their county and creating
the county of Glenn bill was introduced into the
Legislature with that end IN view, and subscriptions
were taken Up at Willows for the purpose of paying
whatswas denoninated the Legitimate expense of
passing the measure. A committee was appointed,
OF which ]. C. Ball was made chairman, and the fund
raised was placed in his hands.
On arriving at Sacramento Ball found that one
Christopher A. Buckley had control of the Legisla-
ture and after various negotiations he agreed to pay
that famous manipulation $4,000 if he would interest
himself in the Glenn County bill. Buckley did in
terest himself in the bill and passed both branches
OF the Legislature. In the Senate motion to re-
consider made, and while this motion was pend
ing Buckley informed Judge Ball that 10000 more
would be required to defeat it.
The additional money was raised by negotiating a
proniissory note signed by J. E. Putnam, K E. Kel-
ley F. G. Crawford August Henning, w. H. Kel-
ley and Joseph Muller, all of whom residents of
Willows and interested in the passage of the div-
sion BILL 1t represented to these men that the
$4,000 would be contributed by the Willows bank
and that putting their names to a negotiable note
meant merely an accommodation. In this way the
money raised and paid to Buckley. Subsequently
the makers of the note refused to pay it. and Ball
began suit to recover.
This action was tried in the Superior Court of
Yoo County, whence it had been transferred by stp
ulaon, and in which Ball obtained Judgment for the
full amount In his testimony at the trial Judge Ball
explained the financial part of the transaction as
follows
My memorandum shows that I got at the Cali
fornia State Bank March Z, $14,5O0 which was
paid the counter and put in carpet sacks. Our
draft for $4,000 drawn there in the bank and
handed to the bank before the money was paid out
1t for $4,000 and $500 drawn on what was
known the Glenn note and $1,000 furnished
by K. e. Kelley. l present when the money
paid The memorandum have shows that
there was paid to Buckley $14550, paid back to K.
E. Kelley $3.50 and balance of 500. My recollection
is that all the money I got from the bank in the
morning was paid over to Buckley. I went along
with the parties that took the money from the bank
Mr.. Crawford, Mr. HILL Buck Kelley and myself
and interested myself in seeing 1t paid to the
party. That part of my business to that the
proper amount paid whatever was vet
unpaid the contract that made by Mr.. KEEL
due, but what statement he made I have no recel-
lection of. had heard that there obligation
to be met but the exact amount did not know. I
went there to that he did not get than
due him. I did not have anything to do with
placing the money in the carpet sacks. may have
carried of the sacks part of the time. did not
carry both of them at any time. have distinct
recollection that Buckleys men did the counting
Buckley handled it. I think he counted it. Buckley
is blind, but he feel money. 1 know that he
became satisfied when he felt 1t that the amount
he claimed paid to him. I think Steppacher or
Rudolph there. When the money was paid
Steppacher, Rudolph, Buckley himself and Mrs
Buckley were present, and there was Crawford, Jim
HILL Buck Kelley, and there may have been others
that have now forgotten.
This testimony is contained in the transcript on
appeal, and when the Supreme Court came to con-
slider the case it OF course perused it. The judgment
of the Yolo County Superior Court was reversed on
a technicalty, but the Supreme Court took occasion
to say that the contract upon which the promssory
note to Ball was made was evidently against public
policy good morals, the express mandate of the
law and as such that it could not be made the basis
of any action, legal or equitable; moreover, the
court added that neither silence the consent of
the parties justified the court in retaining jurisdiction
OF such action.
Probably this reversal will settle the litigation for
ever but the case interesting at this time because it
throws side light upon the way in which leg
islation is procured at Sacramento. Here entire
community conspired to corrupt Legislature, and
in doing it their authorized committee openly and
in the presence of large number of persons paid
ST 5000 to political boss for his influence in passing
bill The interesting question is, how much did
Buckley pay the Senators and Assemblymen for their
votes? Another interesting question is how often
has this process been repeated, and is it being re-
peated at Sacramento at the present time?
-
According to Expert Yale, California has many
as rich mines the one in which wonderful strike
of gold has been made in Colorado. This is good
news, and confirmation of it through mint returns
will be Welcome