Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1906-06-29
round AMONG The GRAFTERS
MeSSfS. Lyon and Christensen Report
To Committee.


Interesting Story of the Manner u
Which the Big Whisky coneern'
Have connived With Representative
Of the State to Defraud South Caro-
!i,s Whisky Drinkers.
The dispensary investigating com
mittee met in Columbia last Tuesday
for the purpose Of considering the set
tlement of the claims of the whisky
houses which sold liquor to the state
last year and which claims were held
up by a resolution of the general AS
sembly. The whisky houses were rcL'
resented by attorneys. John c. Shep.
herd appeared for S. Grabfelder & Co.
w. Boyd Evans represented W. w
Johnson &. Co.; T. M. Mordecai repre-
sented the Richland Distillery; P. H
Nelson represented Ullman & Co., and
Huger Sinkler represented Cook, Bern
heimer & Co.
Messrs. Lyon and Christensen pre-
sented a partial report Of their TRIP
among the Liquor houses, after which
Mr.. Lyon took the position that the
committee had no right to pay any Of
the claims until after the Legislature
shall have taken action. The attorneys
however plead for immediate action
Mr.. Mordecai claimed that the state
dispensary owes 100000 and has only
$325,000 cash with which to pay, and
yet the institution Is being run or
money that belongs to other people
He claimed that the amount due his
client the Richland Distillery Is $121,-
600, and Ii has no money with which
| to continue its business. The holding
up Of the amount due he said. would
amount to confiscation Of the distillery
company's plant.
Mr.. Shepherd represented that his
clients were high toned gentlemen
who would not think of doing the dir
ty things that the others were accused
of doing and there was no reason why
the innocent should be punished with
the guilty. Mr. Lyon pointed out q
case where Grabfelder had been selling
whisky to the state at SO per case high
er than the same whisky was sold tc
other people.
The report of Messrs. Lyon and
Christensen makes an interesting story
that is well worth reading. 1t Is as
follows:
To the Board Appointed to Investigate
the Dispensary:
Your sub committee would respect
fully report that they have visited
various liquor houses, which have
heretofore done business with the
state dispensary, the payment Of whose
claims has been withheld by order OF
this committee. Your committee has
not been able, by reason Of lack OF
| time, to visit all Of them and will re-
fer only to such Of them hereinafter as
we deem advisable for the purpose ol
| this report.
in the city Of New York the Cool
& Bernheimer company were visited
We were received agreeably by this
concern and were allowed to inspect
such books and papers as We required
Their books showed that the state
dispensary was purchasing Mount Yer.
non rye whisky at per cent less thar
other customers as large or larger thar
| the state dispensary. On the Other
hand the chemical analysis, which has
heretofore been presented to the com
mittee, shows that this brand Of liquor
| is sold in Atlanta, Ga, at proof of 81
to 100, while that sold the state dis
pensary Is much lower proof towit:
About 80 proof. See report Of chemist
Your committee Is unable to say what
| this difference in the United States
proof degrees would amount to wher
stated in dollars and cents, but evi-
IDENTIFY from the chemists analysis, the
| liquor sold in Georgia Is more valuable
| from a commercial standpoint thar
| that sold in South Carolina.
In Philadelphia the firm Of Rosskam
Gersley & Co., was visited. The books
of this concern showed, upon investi-
CATION, that Old Saratoga rye whisky
| Is sold to other customers at 20 pei
cent less than to the South Carolina
| ldispensary. Mr.. Gersley explained this
discrepancy by stating there were diff
ferent qualities of liquor put up under
the brand Of Old Saratoga. AS to this
point your subcommittee has no mea rs
of ascertaining the truth or fa,sity
thereof and would direct the attention
of the committee to the testimony ano
chemical analysis in case Of Mr.. l
Trager, which was presented to the
committee at it's session during the
month of February.
The firm of Gallagher & Burton was
also visited in Philadelphia, but Mr.
Gallagher being absent, 1t was unable
| to obtain access to their books. we
however, have been informed by Mr.
Bender, special gauger in the Unit
| ed States revenue service. who has eX'
amined the Richland Distilling coInpa-
ny recently, that Mr.. Gallagher stated II
| his presence that Ii cost him so mucf
to do business directly with the state
dispensary that he turned over his
interest to Mr.. j. s. Farnum Of Charles
ton, s. c., who, we are informed, has
heretofore represented this concern tc
the state dispensary. The exact amount
of the compensation paid Mr.. Farnun
for his service cannot be ascertained.
In the city Of Baltimore we visited
the Wilson Distilling company. Mr.
Jacob A. Ul!man vice president allow.
ed us access to such books and papers
of the concern as we requested anc
| furnished US with an affidavit from
which 1 quote the following:
Several persons from South caro-
lima requested that they be allowed tc
represent us in making sales to the
South Carolina dispensary. / wa:
given to understand that we woulc
have TO give up something or divide w
with certain persons. / gathered from
their statement and demeanor thai
they would have to give some rebate
or graft to the authorities In Soutf
Carolina for any business secured fol
us, but In each case ! stated to these
people that we were doing square
honest business and 1t was not neces'
sary to divide up with any one tt
continue the same business, and tina
we would always refuse to be party
to any such shady transactions. L
was, l believe, sometime In 1905 tina
III. s. Farnum of Charleston went tt
our New York office, which has charge
If the selling of our goods, and asked
that he be allowed to represent US II
South Carolina on a commission basis
He said that he was able to contro
some business In the South Caroline
dispensary and that 1t would be +
our advantage to retain his services
| We agreed to retain his services. Anc
agreed to pay him 10 per cent on th'
amount of goods sold and delivered tt
the dispensary, which is approximately
the cost Of selling our goods through
| our regular statesmen. Shortly aftel
| this agreement was entered into, W.
received orders from the dispensary
which orders have been shipped to th'
amount of $4,000. That he has made
| no difference whatsoever, in the quail