The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1910-08-20
WHERE DID THE
LIQUOR MONEY CO.?
(Continued From Page one.)

as to whether he had not discussed
how he should be paid, and on An
drews denial, told him that his state
ments were false.
Andrews told of his work for the
party, and he called on workers pre-
'sent, all otwhonisttenied that Andrews
had ever asked them to work for any
special aspirant for a nomination.
According to the statements of all
concerned, the Italian-Swiss colony of
California gave $4,000 to the cam
paign fund against the prohibition side
in the recent plebiscite. The money
was given through Joe Cohen, and was
to be used by him and local execu-
tive committee. Only $4,000 of the
money reached the local committee.
This is agreed.
Cohen says that he decided that the
local committee was using the money
as a Democratic campaign fund, and
that he decided therefore TO make his
own fight and spend the rest in his
own way, and that he did so.
The liquor mems side of the story
as given to The Star this morning by
one of their responsible men, is as
follows.
while Mr.. Buchly was IL Cali
fornia last spring on his way east, he
and Mr.. Cohen had a conference with
the California wine people, who had
expressed their willingness to give ST.
500 to the campaign fund here. It
was finally agreed that they would
give $4,000. skEAa5' ,-..-
During this time, draft was 70.
teived from Honolulu, IN favor of Lef.
rim Andrews, for $500. This draft
was honored as a part of theS5, 900. 1t
can be shown by letters that the wine
people honored the draft with that un.
g derstandine.
ION June 10 last the executive com.
mittee had a meeting and discussed
the matter. During the progress of
the meeting Mr.. Bucnly Joined the
other members, in a state of excite.
ment, bitterly accusing Mr.. Cohen OF
bad faith in connection with the five
thousand dollars. Almost immediate
ly after Cohen came in, also excited
Let me explain he said.
"Mr. Cohen proceeded to explain to
the meeting why only $4,000 of the ex
pected $4,5O0,-which was $4,000 less
than the $5O0we understood Lorrin An
drews had received,-was turned over
! to the committee. He said that he
l had given the other 81 800 to Lorri1
$ Andrews, because Andrews was to con
e troll the Republican party and would SCI
< to it that the party had plank favor
! able to the liquor interests contention
! for the present law unchanged
+ "Mr. Buchly at once questioned Mr.
+ Cohen. He asked him if for that sun
LOrrin Andrews would throw down Joe
e Cooke in the Republican party ant
$ agree to protect the liquor interests
] Cohen stated that Andrews would dc
- so.
e Immediately on Cohen's leaving the
l. room Buchly reached Tor a piece o
S paper and wrote down the few ques
e tons and answers. His writing wa!
= shown to the six men present, ant
>, they each signed it and swore to il
p The document can be produced.
las far as the political side of tn
IS matter goes, COhen's charge that tn
T. liquor men are in association with tn
IS Democrats in untrue. The liquor me
f. some time ago formally resolved tina
their organization should not enter DC
litics unless in its own defense"
The matter of the affidavits wa
brought up last night by Chairman A
kinson, who stated that he had bee
II shown certain afIidavits and given pei
u mission to use their contents at tn
~ meeting, but had not been allowed t
W have either the documents or copie
ST of them. He said he thought the ma
ter such a serious one that the con
le mittee should know of it, and Shout
81 act in some way
~ Macfarlane suggested that if the pc
III sons possessing the afTidavits were III
Is willing to produce them, they Shout
Of be given very little consideration. A.
N drews, in reply. to Chairman Atkinson
rs denied ever having made any promise
id or offers, involving either himself {
I'd the Republican party in an allianC
r. with the liquor men. He said h
a wanted to see the affidavits befol
it making a more complete statement
ut had two conversations with liquor me
both Of which were confidential III