The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1905-05-23
.LANDOR A WITNESS
IN A LIBEL CASE
INVOLVING A BRIDGE CONTRACT
At EVANSVILLE, o.
Editor of the Sunday Newa Bound
Over to Await Action Of the
Grand Jury.

Grand Jury.
Ad. Elsperman, editor of the
GAINESVILLE Sunday News, was bound
ever to appear before the grand jury
on the charge of criminal libel. He
had charged ex-County Commissioner
Harry Greiner with having made $780,
900 out of the Y bridge contract. ac-
cusing the official with being CRATER.
Blsperman was prosecuted for GRIM
!nal libel and also for damages.
e. J. -Landor, of Canton, was one
Of the principal witnesses in the case,
as he was a bidder on the bridge. or
the testimony given the following is
taken from a GAINESVILLE paper:
e. M. Ayers stated that he had in
formed the three commissioners prior
TO the letting OF the Y bridge cont: .ct
that a concrete bridge such as their
plans contemplated would cost to con-
struct 100000 The commissioners
we're all present but they did not ask
for his estimate; 1t was given volun-
tary.
Mr.. Ayers said that he was ap-
preached by Landor within few min
utes after he had talked with the COM
.missioners. The court would not al
low the witness to testify as to what
this conversation was at first but the
prosecution withdrew their objection
Mr.. Ayers said Mr.. Landor asked him
a IN tnt tarfa xx,fth
his getting contract for building the
bridge. He said that Mr.. Landor was
rather vicious in his attack and he
would give the figures to the Courier
over his own signature. Mr.. Landor
said:
For goodness sake, don't. do that!
1t might spoil the whole deal"
E. ]. Landor's testimony was as
follows:
Lives at Canton and is bridge
builder. Been in business for him
self since April /, 1902. Prior to that
time had been engaged with the
Dominion Bridge company. Filled the
bid of the Berlin Bridge company for
the building of the Y bridge. The
Berlin Iron Bridge company was then
constituent company. 1t is now a
part of the American Bridge company
Witness drew the plans for the Ber-
lin Bridge company. Consulted with
the Osborne Engineering company for
the purpose of acquiring information
relative to the kind of bridge propos-
cd. The Osborne company never saw
his plans before they were submitted
with the bid and witness had no
knowledge that the Osborne company
would recommend the acceptance of
his plans.
Witness was sure he had never told
Ed. Ayers to keep his oar out while
he was trying to get the bridge con-
tract. Did not go to any other person
and tell them not to tell the commits
sioners what would be the actual
cost of the bridge, which his company
proposed to build. Had no communi-
cation with the Osborne Engineering
company after the bid was filed.
Witness declared that there was no
material change in the original plans
If the bridge, such as the addition of
a span or pier
Witness had no knowledge of how
much money the county paid for the
Y bridge. Would not be surprised If
the county paid more than the con-
tract price.
o. d. Schultz was assistant treas
urer of the American Bridge COM
rany and Cleveland was the contract
ing agent
The witness said that good many
of the bids submitted supposedly by
different companies, were in fact sub
mitted by constituent companies of the
American Bridge company.
Witness knows nothing of the final
disposition of the plans of the Y
bridge. Did not know why Muskin-
gum county had not collected the $25
per day agreed to be forfeited If the
bridge were not completed by GER
tain date.
The witness said that he was here
now in connection with small re-
pair job on the Fifth street bridge,
but he is not now representing the
bridge trust.
Mr. Landor was asked If the Ameri-
can Bridge trust has not department
for salving officials and If ii was not
the custom of bridge companies to set
aside 10 per cent of its contract prices
for the benefit of county officials.
my understanding is"
mot what your understanding is,
hut what you know" exclaimed Pow