Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1910-02-17
AIds's Attorneys Tried to Do 1t by
Proving Him a Self-Confessed
Giver of BribeS.
ANSWER REVEALS DEFENSE
Accuscr of Aids Claimed Distribution
or $4,000 Was Not Bribery
But '.BIackmaiI.,

Albany. n. Y. Feb l7.-Senator
Aids attorneys devoted much time at
the senate investigation of the charges
against their client today to trying to
discredIt his accuser. Senator Benn
Conger. by proving him a self-con-
fessed gIver of bribes
Conger insisted the circumstances
under which he and his brother Frank
distributed $4,000. nine years ago to
protect the American Bridge company.
did not constitute bribery and de-
clared: II should call it bIackmaiI IS
His answer was not allowed to
stand on the record but 1t revealed
the defense he Will make il the pro-
ceedings result In an attempt to
punish him as well as the man he
accuses. 1t is the contention of Aids
attorneys that IL Conger's story is
true he Is bribcr and as his charges
are unworthy or consideration
The cross examination of Coneer
today by the all around third name on
HI Noes envelopes but up to the
time of recess no other names had
been added to those revealed by
Conger yesterday.
LIMITATIONS DISAPPEARING.
Limitations upon the Investigation
into the alleged corrupt use of money
in the legislature nine years ago seem
to be disappearing as the senate in
quiry relative to the charge of Senator
Ben Conger against Senator Jotham
p. Aids progresses.
Senator Conger returned TO the stand
and again insisted he had a talk with
Mr.. Burnett regarding amendments to
the Stevens bill, saying Burnett had
memorandum of the proposed amend
ments. He said, however, he did not
know who put the amendments In tho
bill
The witness was questioned then
about his conversation with Aids. He
said nobody else was present
Conger was made to rehearse what
he says transpnfd between hts brother
Frank. vice president of the American
Bridge company. and Aids. when the
latter called at Senator Congers apart
ments to discuss terms, The witness
said he did not make any objections
pose referred to-
The conversation was upon the sub
ject of bribery, wasn't IT." asked Carr.
BLACKMAIL OR BRIBERY?
Il consider 1t more blackmail than
bribery" declared Conger, with a show
of resentment.
Mr. Carr objected to this answer and
the chairman refused to let 1t stand on
the record.
You understood Mr.. Aids was a
members of the legislature and promis-
ed to receive a certain sum for his ac-
tion on legislation and you didn't con-
slider it BRIBERY"
II considered 1t blackmail," insisted
the witness.
When Carr demanded a categorical
answer Cougar finally replied. mo,
SIR
Il told my brother" said Congor,
that / didn't want anything to do
with the handling of the money be-
cause i was a legislator and 1t was
to be paid to legislator"
Conger's attorneys objected to the
chairman's refusal to let Conger's ans
wer that he considered the payment
blackmail stand. Judge Van Wyck
contended that TO make demand for
money was blackmail. but to meet a
demand by giving money was not
bribery.
Wasn't the money brought here for
that purpose?" pursued Carr.
Yes" admitted Conger
Conger confirmed Hiram c. Noes
statement that the senator had in
structed Moe how to divide the $4,000
sent BY his brother Frank for the
bridge company, and told him the
names to write on envelopes.