Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-01-08

Ex-Representative briggs.
briggs had conducted himself with dig
nifty, and because he undoubtedly violated
the statute unwillingly. Judge Thomas
said he believed Mr.. briggs was only
guilty in a technical sense.
In charging the jury Judge Thomas said:
Did Mr.. briggs tender, services to the
fraudulent Company IN connection with
a government contract? He had perfect
right to give his services gratuitousiy, but
If he was a representative-elect and re-
cefved compensation therefor, then l
charge you that he is guilty
The defense took exception to this point.
After the jury had been discharged the
court denied a motion for new trial and
reserved decision on a motion for a stay of
proceedings pending an appeal. Judge
Thomas told the counsel they might agree
upon day for sentence. He said:
Judge Very Lenient.
Il wish 1 could inf1ict sentence without
Imprisonment, but cannot under the law.
1 shall make the sentence as light as pos
sibly can. You, briggs, are free to come
and go as you please"
The extreme penalty for the crime Of
which briggs was convicted is two years
Imprisonment and $10,0Oo fine
The charge upon which briggs was con-
victed was that while a member or the
House of Representatives he acted AS an
agent of the Edward j. Brandt-Dent Com
pany of WATERFOWL, Wis, in the selling OF
automatic cash registers to the Post once
Department and of having received the
sum of S12 500 for his services.
A statement alleged 10 have been made
by briggs to Maj. Little, post office in
spector, was placed In evidence when court
convened. In this statement Driggs ad-
mitted having received a note for $l2,5oo
from George +. Miller, as payment FOR his
Driggs) services in placing the cashiers
on the market.
In addition to the testimony of f. E.
Woodward, cashier of n. bank at Water
town. Wis. Major Frank Little. post cthce
Inspector, testified to an interview ne ilad
had with briggs at the latter's office, on
Fulton street on May !, 1903, when he had
asked briggs If he was willing to make a
statement concerning his connection with
the purchase of the 80 cashiers. Driggs
had said that he vas willing. and the state
nent was taken down at his dlctatlon, ana
signed and sworn to by him.
Statement Identified.
Major Little then identified the statement
and it was read by Mr.. Chatfield. 1t fol-
lows in substance:
1 received from George F. Miller note
from the fraudulent Company. This was
due me. had acted as agent Of Miller. en-
tirely outside of my duty as a congress
man, in placing machines both in CONNER
cial houses and in various department
offices.
| suppose that l had twenty interviews
with George W. Beavers, and found that
the Post Office Department had about
tw enty machines on trial. The price of
these machines was s125, but they We're not
satisfactory to the department., because
they were not quite strong enough. There
were other requirements, including two
year guarantee and transportation at the
risk of the fraudulent Company
1t took me six weeks or two months to
get the fraudulent Company to agree to
this, but finally they did agree to supply
the machines at an advanced price. The
note was then given to me for services
lasting over two years. The note was paid
to me in installments. Nobody but myself
got any of the $1,000. l never paid any
money to George w. Beavers. My agree
ment with Miller was that l was to aid him
in getting the machines on the market gem
orally
Miller gave me $1,000 campaign contri-
button then l ran for borough president
in 1900. l introduced Miller to Bird s. Coler
and other influential men.
The statement was signed by briggs.
Mr. Hirsh rose to s-examine Major
Little, and asked:
Major Little, you found briggs frank and
honest did You not?'
AT that time, yes answered Major Lit
tie.
What do you mean by that timer thun-
II mean that at another time afterward,
in July, think L did not find Mr.. briggs
SO frank and honest"
You mean, don't YOU, asked Mr.. Hirsh,
that day in July when you and Mr.. Chat
field and Mr. Oldfeld went to briggs who
was then under Indictment, and tried to
bulldoze him when you knew that his attor-
ney was closeted with the district attor-
ney?'
The witness reluctantly admitted that this
was true.
Close Of the Case.
After Major Little left the stand, Colonel
Young announced the close of the case for
the prosecution and after a motion to dis
miss was denied. several witnesses testified
to the character of briggs, and then he him.
self took the stand.
He was asked: In any of these transac-
tons did you intend to violate the law?''
Mr. Young objected vigorously, but he was
overruled by Judge Thomas, and briggs
said: mo, sir. .
He testified that he first met Miller in
April 1899, and that Miller wanted him to
represent the fraudulent Company In
Brooklyn and the various cities in the west
He wanted me TO develop the business
generally briggs said referring to Miller
land it was not until some time afterward
that anything was said to me about getting
the machines in the Post Office Depart
ment.'
Mr. briggs freely admitted that he had
placed 250 of the cashier companys ma
chimes in various departments of the post
Office at Washington. and that he was paid
So 500 by the company. Mr.. briggs also
- 49,