The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-07-08
Hearing in the Anthony Curtis
Case Commenced.
Action of Members Of Board
Considered.
MIR. ANTHONY ON STAND
Said He Was Refused Subpoenas
for Witnesses.
Attorney General Coleman Tells
How Case Was Considered.

The hearing in the Curtis-Anthony
contest case began before T. F. Doran
as commissioner of the supreme court
at 10 o'clock this morning. 1t is be-
ing conducted in the supreme court
room.
This hearing and the one in the
Allen-Bowersock case will be inter-
woven. Some of the witnesses will
appear in both cases.
The attorneys for the plaintiffs this
morning went before Chief Justice
Johnston and explained that a num-
Der OF witnesses could not be secured
today on account of the floods and
asked that more time be given for the
taking OF testimony for the plaintiffs.
The time originally fixed by the court
limited the plaintiffs to today and the
defense to tomorrow
Chief Justice Johnston instructed
the commissioner to begin the hear
ing and examine what witnesses are
available and said the court would
then consider the question of more
time. 1t is understood that some of
the justices have planned to leave
early next week. and as they have all
of their arrangements made they dis
like to postpone the hearing
Mr. Doran is sitting as commits
sioner in the hearing and not as a
referee. He presides over the taking
of testimony and passes on the COM
potency of the evidence offered. but
does not make findings.
The evidence which the plaintiff at
tempted to bring out this morning
was that the state election board re-
fused to issue subpoenaS for witnesses
which Mr. Anthony wanted; that it
refused to consider that Shawnee
county might not be legally a part of
the First district, and the board re-
fused to determine the contest be-
tween Anthony and Curtis on its
merits These things, the attorneys
for the plaintiff will argue, consti-
tute arbitrary action amounting to
fraud, which is what must be proven
in order to secure a hearing on the
merits of the case in the supreme
court
The only persons present at the
morning session were the commission
er, 7. F. Doran, D. r. Anthony, Jr.,
and his attorney, D. r. Hite, J. G.
Slonecker and H. @. Larimer, repre-
General Coleman, and the newspaper
reporters.
Mr.. Anthony and Mr.. Coleman were
the witnesses. Mr.. Anthony testified
that Attorney General Coleman, as a
member of the contest board, told him
that the board did not propose to pass
on the constitutionality of any statute.
Ihls was meant to apply to the queS-
ton of Shawnee county being in the
first district. Anthony further testi-
fed that he had asked for subpoenas
l. Donald
Atchison. w. N. Todd of Leavenworth
county, c. E. Logan of jackson county,
and the members of the committee on
credentials at the state convention. Mr..
Anthony said that these parties were
named in the affidavits as having
knowledge of the alleged conspiracy to
defraud him of the congressional nomi-
nation, but he could not secure volun-
tary testimony from them because they
are his political enemies.
Attorney Coleman testified that the
board did not issue subpoenas because
1t did not believe it had any power to
do so, because the witnesses we're a
long way off-some of them and be-
cause it would have required a further
postponement of the hearing of the
contest after il had already been de-
layed- He said the board also deter
mined to have all evidence submitted
In writing because the introduction of
oral testimony in the Nugent senatorial
contest had been very tedious and pro-
lix-
Asked if the board did not determine
the First district contest on the
strength of the segregation of the Sol
diers' home alone. Mr.. Coleman said
that was State Auditor Wells view,
but that he and Secretary of State Bur
row did not pass on that question He
said he decided in favor of Curtis on
the ground that the convention which
nominated Curtis was the legal conven-
ton; that the primary question for the
board to decide was which was the le-
thought the congressional committee
having simply named the town and the
hour for holding the coT7~~ks~tion, and
finding circumstances which warranted
their action. had a right then to desig-
nate the particular place for holding
it On this ground he had concluded
that the convention held in Maccabee
hall in HoltOn was the legal one, and
he thought Mr. Burrow agreed with
him Later on cross-examination he
said he could not give all the details
which led to that conclusion.
Mr.. Coleman said that the question
of what delegates were legally elected
TO the convention and who were not
did not enter into the determination of
the contest He said he heard the evil
county contests but did not consider
that in deciding the contest.
Mr.. Hite, on oSS-examinatiOn, tried
TO bring out the fact that the board did
not spend much time in reading the tes-
fimony and briefs. Mr.. Coleman admit
ted that he did not read all of the affi-
davits, but thought he read all that
We're material to the case. Mr.. Hite
asked if the witness did not leave To-
peka Immediately after the hearing
closed and did not return until the
Monday morning of the day the decis-
ion was announced, and that the only
time that the board met to consider
both the First and Second district cases
and TO examine the briefs was a very
few minutes before the decision was
announced.
This question was for the purpose of
making the point that the briefs filed
bv the plaintiffs in the contests were
not read and considered, but Mr.. Cole
mans memory was vague on that point,
although he testified that he carefully
examined the briefs.
n