The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1908-02-19
SERIOUS CHARGE.
Senator Blease Said to Have Rep
resented a Liquor House.
AN AFFIDAVIT READ.

MIR. L. ". Parker Swears That S. j.
! Lanahan Told Him That He had
Employed Senator Blease to Re
present His Firm Before the State
Board Of Control.--Biease Read an
Affidavit from Lanahan Denying It.
Testimony which the Legislative
investigating committee Of 1906 de-
clined to bring out was developed by
the commission to wind up the
affairs of the State dispensary
at Columbia on Thursday when
Messrs. Lewis w. Parker and Ellison
A Smyth were put on the stand and
related conversation with Mr.. S.
J. Lanahan, of Baltimore, in 1905,
in regard to the employment Of a
prominent politician" to represent
the Lanahan firm before the State
board of control. Mr.. Parker said
that Lanahan in prior conversation,
when Capt. Smyth was not present
had said that Hon. Coleman L.
Blease was the agent referred to.
1t Is understood that Mr.. Blease,
who is now and has for four years
been State Senator from Newberry,
and who was candidate for Governor
year before last, has an affidavit
from MI. Lanahan denying that Mr.
Lanahan made the statement attrib-
uted to him. He said that he had
read it during the campaign last sum-
mer on the stump at Union, and that
it was published at that time. He
showed the original affidavit, which
he has kept pinned in his inside
pocket.
Those familiar with the dispensary
investigations will recall that two
years ago the Legislative committee
to investigate the dispensary sum
moned Mr.. Parker to appear and ne
realted in substance the conversation
with Mr.. Lanahan, but when pressed
by Mr.. Lyon to give the name OF the
prominent politician he declined TO
do so. AS Mr.. Parker challenged the
power of the committe to make him
answer, case on habeas corpus pro-
ceedings was brought in the Supreme
Court and the Court decided that
the committee had the authority to
REQUIRE Mr.. Parker to answer us
questions. But the committee decld-
ed not to exert its authority and MT
Parker did not answer the Questlon.
It has been common knowledge
however, that the suppressed na-1e
of the alleged agent Of Lanahan was
that of Senator Blease, and TINS
knowledge evidently reached Senator
Blease himself, as he took the pre-
caution to get an affidavit from Ian
ahan, and it is fortunate that ne did,
since Mr.. Lanahan died about t"o
weeks ago. The commission to VINO
IN the State dispensary had already
summoned Mr.. Lanahan.
When they testified Thursday MT.
Parker and Capt smyth nade it plain
that they did so unwillingly and on
" Welded to the recognized authorits
op the commission, which mas Tue
same authority as the Leglsiati7e
committee as decided by the supreme
Court. -ho
II is not worth while to say VINO
Messrs. Parker and Smyth are; they
are the leading two cotton Mill men
in South Carolina, and their caaE-
acters and regulations need no ooAs-
tering.
The lanahan Affidavit.
Following is the affidavit read by
Senator Blease at the campaign meet
no IN Union on August u, 1905.
State of Maryland, City OF Bait
nore-Personally came before me
ssmuel 7. Lanahan, who, being, GUY
sworn says that he never told Lewis
W Parker, or any other person. tna1
Cole L. Blease was in his employ
~ look after his interest in the WIS
KEY business in South Carolina ano
ss matter of fact, he did not nave
Cole L. Blease so employed:
Augustus W. Bradford,
,>,o+o- eeaO Notary Public.
NJ Blease also read ct the Unlon
meeting afidavits from Joole M'
Pawlinscn. John Black, Jos. 3; Wy
lie HH Evans, John Bell ToWlll anu
r. ". Boykin, dated either Aususs
2 1905, or August 4, 1905 ana cav.
~ which stated that during tne a.
6ant,s term of service as director o.
The State dispensary Cole L. bleass
neither directly or indirectly sollei'eu
business or asked that purchases w
made from Samuel j. Lananan u an'
other person engaged in selllns WIS
Ssv or other articles to the State ois,
peosary.