Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1908-04-10
The Difference Between Being
Drunk" and Having Ones
Tank Full" is the Point.
EXPERT LEGAL AUTHORITIES.
Evidence of John a. Williams of SEQ
field Precipitates Lively Debate
In Fraud Hearing.

What is the difference between "be-
ing drunk and having ones tank
full?" This was point which came
the coal land fraud hearing. Lawyers
for the government and Utah Fuel
company seemed unable to define tho
difference and John A. Williams, whose
remarks brought up the debate. held
that having ones tank full" IS not
being drunk" This was but ono OF
the features of this mornings ses-
sion.
The usual half hourly tiff" between
Atty. Zane and Judge Maynard came
regularly. When Judge Maynard in
terrupted Atty Allison, for the de-
PENDANT, In order to tell the witness
not to answer question until he fully
Understood it, Atty. Allison accused
Judge Maynard of attempting to warn
the witness.
Certainly answered Judge Mayn-
ard. Il know what he is up against"
so does he" responded Atty. Alli-
son: she knows he IS up against ly-
ing affidavit with his signature at
tached to i'll"
Showing what government agents
will do" chimed in Atty. Zane.
There Is no inclination upon the
governments part to bring out any
AilHS Dul lnt u lIduu
will be unravelled; that's all we are
trying to do"
II doubt it. came from counsel for
the defense.
WILLIAMS AFFIDAVIT.
Witness williams had the chair
during the major portion of the fore
noon. Williams is resident of Sco-
field and an affidavit, bearing his Sig
irf hn Axyid
This explained that in 1901 the wit
ness came up to Salt Lake, accomp-
anied by James A. Pittman. a saloon
keeper at Clear Greek, Utah. Both
went to the Dolly block, signed cash
coal entry blanks and other papers,
and u few days later got $50 or $50
from the fuel company, according TO
the statement.
Counsel for the defense seemed 20
have ''inside" information about the
trip Williams and Plttman made to
Salt lake. Coming down you had
drink or two, didn't you?" asked Atty.
Zane.
HAD SEVERAL DRINKS.
YES" confessed the witness with a
smile. Several, in fact" continued
Atty, Zane. Yes. had a big bottle
and we hit II pretty often" And you
don't remember much OF anything that
went OH, no SOUA ibihs7hADSI Ii q
way; i signed papers but didn't read
them. didn't know was doing wrong.
knew I could make $50 for signing
coal land papers, but didn't understand
the laws, SO thought 1t was all proper
and straight.
1T was not until government agent
came to Scofleld in the fall OF 1897 that
| knew there was any fraud"
Ibid you and the agent have much
of conversation? Did you have a few
drinks together?'
one"
did he pay for thepn?"
mo, ] was the father OF both; he
took soda water and took whisky"
NICE DISTINCTION.
"oh. then he took soda water and
YOU took a drink" added Judge Zane.
The nice distinction brought out
laugh from all hands. Another laugh
was enjoyed when the witness said,
II Always tell the truth--nearly," ana
again when he said, THE government
man was perfect gentleman I've
known perfect gentlemen to be adept
liars however"
Attorneys for the defense brought out
statements from Williams which We're
I'm direct contradiction TO some state
mcnts In the affidavit introduced by
the government on several points
Williams denied that he had ever told
any government man or anyone elSe
what he was quoted as saying in the
afildavit. When he was excused. Pitt
man was called and at noon had got up
10 a point wheps he was about 10 tell
OF the trip he and Williams mado to
Salt Lake. Both sides are confident
they can establish. clearly, difference
between being drunk' and 'having n
tank fiill" as each side has much at
stake in showing Just what williams
condition was when he signed the en-
try slips in 1901. The same Is applica-