Mexico weekly ledger., 1904-05-05
OWEN ANSWERS OREAR.
To John D. orear.

10 John ID. Orear.
MEXICO, Mo-, May AT Beaeles
school house and elsewhere you charge
that l gave false testimony in the
case Of State vs.. Barnes, and that |
was bribed to do so.
AS soon as l learned OF your charge
l went into the neighborhood and
learned from the lips OF those who
heard you that you made the direct
charge.
On the 22nd Of April 1 wrote you a
letter calling your attention to the
injury you had done me and asking
you to right the wrong. You re-
mained silent after receiving my let
ter. Not hearing from you by April
q, l caused my letter to be published
as the only means ! had OF protecting
my good name.
On Friday, the 10Th, you publish a
political article in the papers, refer.
ring to my letter and in 1t you say:
II mentioned the strong suspicion
-
OF a case OF perjury in the murder
trial Of the State VS. @. A. Barnes, and
no effort made at prosecution. And l
am ready, II given an opportunity, to
prove all l asserted In that speech and
not one word to r~etract."
Cornered by the facts you dodge and
deny. You undertake to justify by
denying the charge that l know you
made. In your speech you said l had
been bribed. In your article you de-
ny that you said 1t and say that you
mentioned" a suspicion" OF perjury,
but give no names. Your article is not
frank nor manly. You made the
charge and must either sustain 1t or
bear the consequences Of making a
false statement. Your letter is an
effort to evade the legal consequences
of your SANDER, but when you
claim you were talking on ''sus-
picion," condemn yourself, for fair
men do not peddle suspicious and
frank men do not consider that proof
of a suspicion against unnamed per-
sons Justify you In charging me, per-
sonally, with the commission OF crime.
In your letter you abandon the
charge of bribery made against me,
and your piano story that you started
on me is, by your letter, not even
restated, and this conduct on your
part is a confession of the falsity Of
your charge. Instead Of meeting
my request squarely you hedge, you
duck, deviate and deny.
In your letter you say:
"The said Owen did not testify at
the public preliminary trial, and his
testimony In the secret chamber OF
the grand jury was not known to the
associate counsel for the State"
Sam B. Jeffries, Assistant Attorney
General Of the State Of Missouri, heard
my testimony In the ''secret chambers
Of the grand jury" vas present and
heard me testify at the final trial, and
he was leading counsel for the State,
and when you say associate counsel"
for the State did net know what my
testimony would be, | do not know
whether you speak the truth or not,
but | know and you know, that the
Attorney General and the
Prosecuting Attorney did know what
my testimony would be, for they had
heard 1t before, and your dodge that
Associate counsel" did not know is
ridiculous.
You produce an affidavit from w. ii.
Turner. II | ever talked with Mr..
Turner about the case | have not the
.emotest recollection of 1t, / do not re-
member OF speaking TO him about itat
I'll. / am positively certain that l
never made to himy0r TO anyone else,
,he statement contained In his AMI
lavit. Many persons asked me about
,he case, but | always attempted TO
void discussion OF 1t, and to keep from
discussing 1t with curious persons,
who were not officers and had nc right
put questions to me. l attempted {
give some answer that would indi-
ate to them that did not desire to
liscuss the facts OF the case. Perhaps {
Turner was mi OF the many that {
to talk with me casually, s
or a purpose, about the case, but he {
S certainly mistaken 10 what he says
That there was nothing in his testi-
nony which would contradict me Is {
made plain by The fact that he was .