The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-03-06
HIS CASE is Ut.
Campbell Case Appealed to the
Supreme Court.
Convicted Member of Kansas
City School Board.
SENTENCED TO PRISON.
Now Claimed That the Court
Made Errors.
SENTENCED TO PRISON.
Mr.. COleman's Opinion About
BOodlers and Bride Takers.

BOodlers and Bride Takers.
Frank NJ Campbell, the member of
the Kansas City, Kan, board of edu-
cation, who was convicted in the lower
court of boodling and sentenced to
from one to seven years in the peniten-
tiary. was given hearing in the su-
preme court Monday afternoon.
Attorney General Coleman. who is
supposed to represent the state was
not present. He is busy at Clay Cen
ter attending to his private practice in
the district court which is in session
there. F. S. Jackson, Mr.. Coleman's
assistant, was hastily summoned to the
court room, but he has only recently
assumed the duties of the Office and
knew nothing about the case. The case
was therefore submitted without argu-
ment, so far as the state was concerned.
John A. Hale of Kansas City repre-
scented Campbell. Campbell is trying
to secure a reversal of the judgment of
the lower court upon several grounds.
of which the chief are these:
That the lower court erred in over
ruling motion made for discharge on
the ground that more than three terms
Of court had elapsed since the fling Of
the Indictment
That the court erred in admitting
evidence about what Campbell testified
to before the grand jury.
That the court erred in admitting the
check for s412 which is the claim was
the price paid for Campbelrs infiu-
cree.
Mr.. Hale made a long and able argu-
ment In behalf of Campbell. He con-
tended strongly that when Campbell
Fr---r
PEELED to make certain statements.
which were subsequently testified to
/ by members Of the grand jury to his
disadvantage. He held that such ad-
missions are not competent evidence.
and that the four members of the
grand jury who testified were incom-
petent witnesses for the state.
The story. of the case goes back to
the time of the flood of 1903, when some
of the Kansas City school houses were
among the buildings which were mum
| dated. Campbell. it is claimed, entered
into an agreement with a man named
G.. e. Gilhaus by which Gilhaus was to
clean the mud and water out of one of
the school houses, and receive therefor
a very high price. Campbell was at that
time member of the Kansas City, Kan.
school board, and had charge Of the
cleaning up Of the school houses.
Price Was S412.
After it was all over, the fact came
out that Campbell has been paid S4f2
by Gnhaus, and the suspicion was ere
ated that Gilhaus had paid this amount
for the purpose Of getting the contract
to clean out the building. The matter
was brought up before the grand jury
and evidence was introduced to show
that it took Gilhaus 2715 days to clean
out the school house. Campbell ex-
planned the check for $412 by saying
that he had sold to Gilhaus the patent
right to a certain kind of a valve which
would be of value to him in cleaning
out the building. He was unable 10
explain just why the amount happened
to be $412 The state proved that at SIS
per day, the 271k days work done by
Gilhaus would amount to S41250, and
they claimed that the SIS day was
what Gilhaus paid Campbell for the
contract Evidence was introduced TO
show that Campbell knocked soft the
extra so cents and Gilhaus set EN- up .
There is one other ground for reversal
urged by the attorneys for Campbell. They
say that al the trial of the case evidence
was introduced to prove that Campbell
had been overpaid 800 by the bank cash-
had refused to return the money. The at
torneys for Campbell say that Campoell
was not on trial for short-changinE any
body, and that this evidence tended 10
prejudice his case. Nevertheless It IS an
interesting fact that a cashier of a bank
should allow himself to overpay 500 on a
$z12 check.
Coleman on BoodIers.
The conclusion of Attorney General
| Coleman's brief gives his opinion about
boodlers and bribe-tekers. It says:
While the appellant is entitled to the
full benefit Of all the record may show
] in his favor, yet it should be remembered
that the crime for which he was convicted
/ by a Jury of his own county IS one which
touches the state, the public. society, In a
most vital part. The murderer Stays his
victim. and his crime rends the hearts of
! a family. a community. The robber spells
the savings of years, and brings loss to
/ a few persons. The adulterer pollutes a
household and scandalizes a neighbor-
hood. The jointist brings babbling, red
/ ness Of eyes, and degradation to himself,
4 his victims and his families. But the
! -taker-the bOodler-strikes society
/ and government at the very heart. He
/ is the trusted agent and representative
! of the people-the public. When he sells
his soul for gold he barriers with 1t, also
! his manhood. his trust, the confidence Of
/ the public. His crime is, at once, a theft,
/ betrayal of friends, the prostitution of a
public trust 1t Is insidious and danger
! Gus because difficult to detect. More
/ dangerous than any or all the others com
/ bined. it destroys public confidence. de-
/ grades public morals. and corrupts the
very foundations OF justice and govern
ment. Particularly are all these things
/ true when the interests betrayed relate
to our educational system, in which
more closely than any other, the mind.
/ heart and well-being of the public and OF
I