The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-06-24
'Jack- Pots Had Fig
ured Long in Illinois
Politics.
HOPKINS KNEW
OF TIL Err USE
But Former Senator Can't Tell
Committee Whether or Not
Such Funds Had Helped
Lorimer to His Seat
in United States
Senate.

Washington. June 2s.-"Jack- pots
or corruption funds, in the Illinois
Legislature constituted "one Of the
traditions of politics in Illinois," ac-
cording to the testimony OF former
Senator Albert j. Hopkins to-day be-
fore the Lorimer Investigating com
mittee OF the Senate. M
Senator Lorimer succeeded Mr.. Hop
kins Whether any of the Jack pot
FUNDS or other corruption funds had
been used to defeat him for Senator he
was unable TO tell the committee OF
MS own knowledge. He explained. how
ever. that he would be the last man
10 know of such corruption practices,
oeca use he was.s at sthe time Of the
election OF a Senator; "in the position
OF a man..in a crowd Knocked down
with bludgeon, who knew no more
about 1t than the icrowd, bit was hurt
worse than it,
Bnncroft q Witness.
The only other Witness Of the day
was Edgar a. Bancroft general counsel
Tor the 1nternationali Harvester Com
pany. who testified thatsthe general
Manager. Harry s. Funk had told
OF the attempt of n Mr. Hines to raise
money TO meet the expenses OF elect
ing Lorimer Mr.. Hopkins declined to
! answer specific questions as TO whethe e.
he suspected Lormer was using cor
rupt methods to defeat him, or as to
whether or not he believed certain
members of the Legislature had been
bought.
Mr.. Hanecey, council for Lorimer.
protested against the witness leaving
the stand without expressing an opIn-
| lon on the rumor that the fifty-three
/ democrats
the last ballot received money.
1t leaves cloud on these men,
insisted tha,s counsel! The COMMITTEES
did not dhifs Tie. witness A to an
swer AS to personal relations between
the witness and Senator Lorimer. Mr..
hopkins said Mr.: Lorimer had told
| him he would oppose his candidacy.
Judge Hanecey attempted to get the
witness to admit that Lorimer had al
ways been popular with the Democrats
and had repeatedly carried q Democra-
tic district
knew he was g. great organizer
was as far as the witness would go.
Mr.. Bancroft. in relating what Mr.
Funk told him, said that he had no dis
| tinct recollection of the words used by
| Mr. Funk In the conversation The ef-
| feet of 1t. however, was that Mr. Hines
had asked Mr.. Funk to contribute for
the company $4,000 to meet the ex-
penses of Senator Lorimer.s election.
Mr.. Bancroft told Mr.. Funk asking
his advice as to whether he should
made public the alleged request This
was during the consideration OF the
Lortmer case by the Senate.
I told him that that was a matter
Tor his conscience" said Mr.. Bancroft.
| He added that he told Mr. Funk that Il
probably would result In hostility to
| the company OF which they were Of
| Ulcers. a
| Lawyers Duty.
| Members of the committee asked the
attorney II he did not consider his own
| duty TO have been to notify the first
! Lorimer investigating committee or
this matter. Don't you think a law
yer owes a greater duty to his coun-
| try than to his olient?" asked Sena-
| tor Kenyon.
Mr.. Bancroft replied that at the
time he did not consider the matter
| to be SO important as 1t is now re-
| garded, and therefore not important
enough to Justify an attack on the
company. Judge Hynes asked who
| was expected TO make this attack. ana
the witness replied that Lorimer and
| his friends were feared because they
were in conflict with those VINO OPP
| posed them"
Judge Hynes asked IL he did not
| consider 1t strange that Mr.. Hines
should go to company that was not
friendly to him with request for a
| contribution.
Mr.. Bancroft disclaimed Knowledge
of hostility towards Mr.. Hines
| Ibid you believe what Mr. Funk
said?" asked Judge Hynes
81 certainly did," replied the wit
&.