The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1908-02-21
GARD FROM MIR. PARKER.
Statement In Answer to Senator
Blease in Regard to Testimony
Before Dispensary Commits
sion.

Please pardon few words in an.
swer to Senator Cole l.. Blease in his
recent remarks in the State senate
with reference TO my testimony be-
fore tire winding up commission.
The absurdity Of the charge Of
conspiracy as made by Mr.. Blease
must be apparent, but there may be
some conditions not understood by
all. Neither Capt. Smythe nor N.Y.
self was a supporter Of Gov. Ansel in
the recent campaign. For myself,
though 1 had The highest personal re-
gard for him, I differed with him on
the issues Of the campaign and vot-
ed for another.
l have never had n communication
with him or any one else referred to
by Mr.. Bleasc with reference to my
testimony, except with Mr.. Avery
Patton, to whom, after having been
subpocnacd as witness before the
winding up commission, | wrote on
Dee. 80, urging him "not again to
put me TO the humiliation Of appear
ing in a matter about which | know
practically nothing." TO this letter
I never had il reply and had not
seen Mr.. Patton until appeared be-
fore the commission a few days
since.
Did Not Wait-Was Forced.
Mr.. Blease asks the question why
waited until after Mr.. Lanahan's
death to answer the question as to
who Mr.. Lanahan had told me was
was representing him in South Car
Dina. I agree with him that it was
unfortunate that the answer had to
be made subsequent to Mr.. Lanahan's s
death, but I had no choice in the mat
ter.
No one knows better than Mr..
Bleasc why the question was not an
swcrcd two years ago at the time Of
the hearing before The Legislative
committee, in June, 1906.
BY Mr. Blease's Own Vote.
1t was upon Mr.. Blcasc's own mo-
tioa and by the effect Of his own vote
that l was excused from answering
the question at that time, against the
earnest protest of Mr.. Lyon, now
attorney general, and two other
members of the INVESTIGATING COM
mittee.
Having been excused by the inves-
tigating committee from answering
the question then, it certainly would
have been improper and inconsistent
for ME subsequently 10 have rushed
into print to make public statements
which l had asked the Legislative
committee to excuse me from max
ing before them.
Having been excused then from
disclosing the parsonage referred to
by Mr.. Lanahan, I was not called up
Oil to note any denial by him that
Mr. Blease was the person referred
to.
1t will be noted, however, that Mr..
Lanahan never denied any part Of
the conversations referred to by me
in my testimony. He merely denied
that he had told me that Mr.. Blease
represented him, which at that time
i had not testified to before the COM
mittee, because, as stated, 7 had
been excused.
Says Blease Knew of It.
MIR. Blaasc certainly surprises me,
however, in his statement to the ef-
feet that he had no idea that 7 had
referred to him in my statements be-
fore the investigating committee.
when / testified in June. 1906, Mr..
Lanahan had been advised of my hay
ing been subpocaned and of the nee
essity Of my tcstifying to my CONVEX
sation with him if the court decrccd
that L should do so; furthermore,
the attorneys representing Mr.. II. II.
Evans had been advised before I tcs-
titled Of the purport Of my testi-
mony. As the intimacy between Mr.
Blcasc and Mr.. Evans was we'll
known, I had presumed that it had
Ibecn communicated to Mr.. Bleasc
what my testimony would be.
: This presumption was confirmed
il my own mind by statements of
MIR. Blcase to me. On the evening of
my testimony, whilst Mr.. Haynes
worth and I were supping together
at Wright's hotel, Mr.. Bleasc, VINO