Bryan morning eagle. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1898-1909, 1907-05-12
PERCE'S FIVE REASONS.
Reply He Filed In United States
Circuit Court.

St. Louis. May 1f.-Sheriff q. s.
Matthews of Travis county. Texas. nr.
rived from Austin TO take charge Of
II. c. Pierce. chairman OF the board
OF the waters-Pierce oil company. who
surrendered to arrest Wednesday on a
Texas indictment charging him with
having committed perjury in an aft.
davit made In 1900 concerning the oil
company Immediately after Pierce's
Arrest writ OF habeas corpus was So.
cured from the United States circuit
court on the ground that Pierce was
unlawfully being restrained of his lib.
erty.
Sheriff Matthews said: II don't In.
tend TO handicap Mr.. Pierce or TO
take him hack 10 Texas In irons. but
i do intend to see that Texas gets
what Is coming TO II In the way OF lie.
gal rights.
1T strikes me as funny that Mr..
Pierce. after voluntarily surrendering.
should go into court and claim he was
being restrained OF his liberty"
Sheriff Matthews stated he would
appear In the United States circuit
court with an attorney. Mr.. Pierce
was released from custody wednes.
day on $4,000 bond. pending the hear
Ing Saturday. In statement given
out by Mr.. Pierce the declaration Is
made that the affidavit was true
The statement. in part.
follows:
The affidavit which I made on the
3ist day OF May. 1900. at Austin. Tex.
Is unquestionably true. made II aft
or full consultation with my attorneys.
The affidavit states that the Waters.
Pierce OIL company. organized under
the laws of the state OF Missouri. on
May 20. 1900. had not made nor enter.
ed into. and was not a member of any
pool. trust. agreement. contract or con.
federation to fix the price or limit the
quantity OF any article OF merchandise
The affidavit does not contain n
nnor did the law OF Texas
require of n foreign corporation. such
rs the Waters-Pierce oil company. any
statement with respect TO who were Il I,
or who were Interested |
In II. II has been repeatedly and libel. |
ously said by many malicious or
fhoughtless persons and newspapers. |
hat the affidavit contained the state |
ment that the Standard OIL company |
)f New Jersey was not interested n !
he waters-Pierce OIL company. either |
rs a stakeholder or otherwise. Tho |
Affidavit did not contain any such |
statement. and any statement of that /
character Is made in perversion OF |
he contents OF affidavit. and is un.
grounded and unjustified malice TO.
wards me-"
Mr.. Pierce's reply 20 the return OF
Chief OF Police Creecy to the habeas
corpus proceedings filed In the United
states circuit court, specifies five rea
ions why he should be set free. and
lot returned TO Texas for trial. These
easons are:
I. II Is shown by sufficient evidence
hat the statements made by Pierce In
IFS affidavit TO get the Waters. Pierce
)il company readmitted to Texas were
alse at the time he made them. This
3 merely the conclusion OF the grand
ury.
2. II Is not shown that the Waters.
fierce OIL company was apart OF any
rust or combination 10 control the
rice OF OIL
3. No charge OF perjury or false
wearing could be legally predicatcd
n any statement In Pieroe's state
tent.
4. Pierce could not be guilty o.
llse swearing under the laws OF Tex
5 because the affidavit he made was
equlred by law.
3. Il appears on the face OF the In.
lctment that the alleged offcnse was
ommitted more than four years be I
IRE the date OF the indictment
Pierce asks 10 be discharged from
lstody
IS DENIED