Los Angeles herald., 1910-10-18

and reverses the situation in this Ian
guage:
/ believed, and we believed, that
the people who were instrumental
in forging that will were also the
people that we were fighting in the
civil suit.
WOULD NOT PROBE HARPER
IN his introduction to further dis
cussion of the Harper-Kern WhiteWash
Mr.. FredericBs has this to say:
Now, Mr.. Woolwine, either Will
lingly or unwillingly, either know
ingly or unknowingly, was the ao-
solute tool that was used, If he did
not do it of his own intention, to
thwart me in that case.
"As to whether I am tool of any
man or set of men on the face of the
earth, l will leave the people OF Los
Angeles county to judge.
"By an exceedingly clumsy and pre-
posterousaargument he tries to crawl
away fronFthe absolute suppression or
a full, fair and impartial investiga-
tion into the Harper administration
and states in substance that at the
time the speaker made charges of vice
protection he, Fredericks was conduct
ing an investigation into corrupt con-
ditions, and that my published charges
made it impossible for him to further
successfully pursue the Investigations.
The truth with regard to this matter
is as follows:
GAS far back as May, 1908, many
months before the Harper-Kern grand
fury. 1 began to inform the public
as to the evil conditions in the city
and tried on one or two occasions to
interest Mr.. Fredericks by calling at
his office and telling him the fact that
1 was powerless to enforce many of
the laws, by reason of the mayor and
the police commission, and l stated
to him specifically the conditions as to
the red light district. And, in spite of
all this, Mr.. Fredericks never once in
timated to me that he was conducting
any Investigations, gave me no encour-
age ment and, in fact, his attitude and
nv helplessness when knew that the
situation in the red light district was
honeycombed with graft caused me to
make public his position when
charged that could receive no sup
port from him.
CONDUCT WAS SHAMELESS
"Then following his insulting let
ter, which he took the trouble to read
to his audience as well as other let
ters written to me; but he failed to
read single answer of mine which
would have explained my attitude to-
MIN anu Ills dDSOlul0 pOIhdS anu
faithlessness in that entire contro-
verSy.
''Mr. Fredericks' shameless conduct
in the matter of the whttewash OF
Harper and Kern is so we'll known ana
is so amply substantiated by his re-
fusal to allow me to examine witnesses
before the grand jury, his promise to
me to stay out OF the grand jury room
and leave me unhampered, the repeat
ed requests of the grand jurors to Mr..
Fredericks to retire from the case and
leave them unhampered so that they
might get a disinterested attorney to
conduct the investigation, and the
forced designations of Harper and
Kern-I say that all these facts are
so we'll known as to obviate further
comment along this line.
'"The second grand jury passed the
whole matter up to Mr.. Fredericks in
this language:.
From the evidence introduced
during this investigation it is the
unanimous belief of this grand
jury that large amounts of money
were paid for the protection of
prostitution in the so-called red
light district to certain public and