The Hawaiian gazette., 1910-08-23

$3.50 fe it4tis ftf t.H
ffHH ftH at fHaHf rH
.I.rI ttH ff.II.ff HtH Naf.I
IHil HHf UIf 900 $50 tFHHH H
fa mH nHH fhH ftI I'HH
aHFfaHH.t lhr mI. AfNffHa IH|Hritai
f Nn.It nf.f ta .ffH Ef ttr Nf
nIa.a1 rarif Ht. I|nf al hfffIfiffait
fttUf tHf INrH 4HH tfHW fIIftrI IU
mfH nH.nff fEaf ~ IuNtr. lal
a fUm fh.a anhHf ErrN ia lf aF Hrfnr
.I InHnfHtiaI unffef lh ttt Republican
fHrIF. aa tfU at ono Uf Hs mHHi iH.
I.HHinrf etfrufa nf nrarrial assistance.
rrt insisting itat ODE NHruhIIChn party
niusr prohibition vithin che Toff tors
OF Hawaii. and thHi iho Leaders 30 thr
party start H movement COG thr adoption
ht ihf ness Republican territorial and
county conventions ~ q prohibition
plank in ihr party platform. aud that
hc. che said Andrews. feared that IN
said Cookies request we've rejected that
thc said Cooke would refuse further
financial assistance and could prevent
financial assistance from others; that
he. che said Andrews, desired 20 be
independent of the said J. i. Cooke,
and desired assistance not coupled with
"a demand for prohibition; but that he
required money for independent work
in securing HE position as leader pf
the Republican party, and the reppdia-
tion Of both Mr.. Cooke and prohibition
meant the cutting OF Of funds; Mr..
Andrews then offered that II the Whole
sale Liquor Dealers Association OF Ha-
waii would pay ham, personally, the sum
of $4,000, he would repudiate Mr.. j. y.
Cooke and guarantee that no prohibition
plank would be adopted by tho Repub.
lican party, either in convention or
otherwise; that no one would be nomi-
mated by the next Republican city and
county convention that was inmical to
the liquor interests in Hawaii, and TO
secure his good faith, he, Andrews,
prior to the nominations at such con-
| vention, would submit 10 afiant the
names of the proposed nominees for his
(aAiant's) approval. -
'fCHAS G. BARTLETT,
Subscribed and sworn TO before me
| this 18th day of June, A. ID. 1910.
"E. c. PETERS,
Notary Public. First Judicial Circuit,
Territory of Hawaii"
There was a good deal of sparring
back and forth between Cohen, Buchly
and Bartlett before Andrews had n
chance TO make a statement.
Andrews statement was a general
denial of the facts set forth in the
affidavit. He stated that Bartlett had
called upon him, but, instead of the
offer of treachery being made by An
drews, the offer had come from Bart
| lett. Andrews said that Bartlett was a
comparative stranger to him at the
time, the only other occasion on which
he had met him being when he was
deputy attorney general and was pre-
pairing to enter suit against the brew
cry TO deprive that institution of it,
license after the "Beer Sunday" which
Bartlett had engineered He had had
no reason to think that after that Bart.
lett would be friendly.
Bartlett, however, had called on poll.
ties and was treated courteOusly, An.
drews plan being to meet all factions
of the party and harmonic them. Bart.
lett asked him what the situation was
in regard to the party and prohibition
having been told that Joe Cooke wal
determined to force prohibition planl
in the platform. As he (Bartlett) wal
a Republican, he did not want to bC
forced to fight the party, and wanted Il
know what could be done. Andrew
stated that he thought there would b.
no prohibition plank, because the party
included prohibitionists and antiprohibi
tiOnists alike, and the party was bigger
than either faction. No one faction, il
his opinion, ought to prevail. He de
MED fatty having either asked, suggest
ed or accepted any money, or even dis
cussed the matter of the liquor dealeri
: contributing towards the Republican
campaign fund. The statements mad
in the affidavit were untrue on theiI
face.
No Results to Show.
Andrews then took up the question
of having received money from CoheI
for having worked for his particula,
,, candidacy. eff / have worked fol
Cohen, or for any one candidate, i
would surely be showing now" he said
"The nominations for the convention
are only a week off. Now, where i
there man who will say that ! eve
asked him to work for Cohen, vote 70
Cohen, or do anything nut get in lin
for the party and work for the success
of the partyin
? Andrews called upon a number o
. those present, heads of a number o
precincts. Each OF these testlned u
the good work Andrews had don
: in harmonizing the workers, an,
q all denied having been asked or toll
] to work for any particular candidate
!. Later, Wise made his statement. Hi
! affidavit is yet to come.
g The Five Hundred.
;, The meeting listened to great man
' Of the details of how the antiprolnbi
: tionists raised their campaign FUND
@ how. it was distributed and how it wa
spent. It appears that there was
, question Of policy between Cohen an
q the rest of the liquor dealers as to wha
a ought to be done in the way Of cam
! paigning. Cohen believed that the Re
4 publican party ought to be enlisted t
help defeat the plebiscite, while !
Peters, the attorney for the liquor mel
: advised them to tie up with the Demo
. Gratis. At any rate, Cohen went t
! California and got $4,000, Buchly hay
4 ing gone to the same people and bee
q put off with $3.50. While in San FraI
a cisco Cohen stated that he had alread
!. lspent $500 Of his own money and wan