The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-10-24
KELLY AND THE SENATE.

torial in the Topeka Capital of Sunday
morning appeared under the heading
| Corporate Influence in the Kansas
Legislature Perhaps few people
read it. The lengthy exposition began
with the sentences: 1.-The people of
Atchison and Jackson counties have a
special responsibility this year in their
election of state senator" Then fol-
lowed alleged reasons why Mr.. Wag-
gener should be defeated for the state
senate.
Mr.. Waggener is one of the attor-
neys of this paper in the defense OF
a $4,000 libel suit brought by the
state school fund commissioners be-
cause of the exposures made of an
Ubiquitous public purchase. Since the
original charges were printed, nearly
every one of them has been proven by
sworn testimony in the form of deposit
tions, and there are more dispositions
to come.
| The State Journal has two other
able lawyers in the case: Joseph G.
Waters of Topeka, and w. P. Hackney
of Winfield. Each and all of these at,
torneys are more interested in defend
ing the State Journal because they
are thoroughly convinced that it was
right in exposing one of the most
scanda1ous transactions in the history
of the state than they are concerned
for any money they may receive as at
torney fees.
The State Journal has proven that T.
T. Kelly embezzled the states funds to
carry out the deal in the Comanche
county bond purchase. Mr.. Kelly has
resigned in escrow, and it is stated by
Mr.. Kelly's friends that the next SEN
ate may investigate him.
If Mr.. Waggener be elected to the
senate he will be one of the first and
foremost in pushing a senatorial in
vestigation of the rotten and corrupt
conduct of the state treasury of Kan
sas.
Is it any wonder that Mr. Kelly's or
gan in Topeka goes out of it's way just
now to give so much attention to a lit
tie contest in the state senate. to en-
compass if possible Mr.. Waggeners de-
feat?
This paper also happens to know
something of Mr.. Waggener's course in
the last legislature in the house in con-
nection with the city charter bill.
In this same article in the Topeka
Capital making this attack ON 3. a.. |
Waggener as candidate for state sem
is this paragraph:
1.-TWO years ago the Kansas Municipal |
league composed of officials of cities of |
the first class, drew up a general city |
charter bill and proposed it to the leg1s- |
lature. This bill was carefully framed |
after extended conferences and colnpar-
isonS with the existing law and the |
laws of other states. In recommending |
it far passage the league stated that |
this bill is the result of many years |
of hn lea
an organization made up of officials of |
cities of the first class. This is a body |
which serves entirely without compens-
alton and whose aim is to unity and |
systematic the work and methods of |
all cities of the first class Through the !
of Bale Waggener, the /
bill was defeated in committee and a /
bill drawn up by Waggener submitted |
and after some amendments enacted IN
the present law.
The above, so far as it refers to Mr..
is a gross Misrepresentation
of the facts. When the bill prepared
by the Municipal league was submitted
to the legislature, Mr.. Waggener took
the position that the sections of that
bill relative to public utilities did not
contain sufficient restrictions to protect
the people. He prepared and offered |
an amendment which gave the cities
power to purchase, manage and control
public utilities. In the amendment
which he offered, he provided for an
appraisement of property by the city
and took away the right of appeal, $50
that the cities could purchase the prop |
erty based upon such valuation
without extended litigation.
This amendment of Mr.. Waggener's
was so extreme in it's provision in the
interest of the city that large number
Of persons interested in public utilities
came to Topeka from Wichita, Fort
Scott, Leavenworth and Atchison to re-
sist the amendment offered by Mr.
Waggener. It was contended by them
that if his amendment became law,
1t would be q confiscation to all public
utilities.
Among those who came here opposing
his amendment We're Mr.. J. NJ
Chishom and F. G. CroweI of Atchison,
who represented the water company of
that city. Mr.. Waggener's fight in favor
Of his amendment was persistent and
Notwithstanding a number
Of his friends from Atchison were in
Lerested in public utilities in that city,
and were here urging him to recede
from his position, and Notwithstanding
the fact that he himself was known to
be personally interested in the Street
Railway company at Atchison. and
that his amendment was antagonistic
10 his own personal interest. The con-
-roversy over this amendment lasted
several days and it seemed that the
lea que bill would fail unless
some concessions were made to Mr..
Waggener in regard to extending the
power of cities concerning the purchase,
mana cement and control of public utili-
les, and the law as it now stands is a
between the sections of the
avg as renorted by the Municipal league |