The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1911-09-29

such.
We'll, let it go in was Judge vii
son 'es brief decision as 20 whether the
! bill for the labels was admissible as
evidence.
The labels were also given the Of
fetal Co.. X"
| Bids on Label Contract.
1t was finally permitted to gel
through the legal firing lines that a
bid on the labels was made by the
State and Walker, Evans & Cogswell
NJ. Johnstone, in objection to some
Of the evidence, suggested that NO
possible good could come from coun-
sci '*sassing" each other.
On discrimination by Col. Mel
son, Mr.. Christensen said he was paid
S. cay, while actually engaged. Mr..
Christensen said while lawyers were
getting good fees he was simply get
ting his expenses, no more. He was
asked why he was so positive the Ia
Fbels exhibited were those gotten at the
dispensary, and at the dispensary
hearing he believed" they We're the
same labels.
The cross-eXamination continued up
and down, merrily chasing who, when
and where, certain papers came into
his possession.
Comparative Prices.
He was insistently asked if the State
and Walker, Evans e Cogswell did
not know he did not want the labels.
He said he simply asked for bids. He
never intended to buy the labels, but
he simply wanted comparative prices.
He offered no inducement to the bid
ders, but simply wanted to know what
it would cost to duplicate the order.
Very likely the bidders he asked for
figures knew why he was asking for
prices.
Mr.. ,Iohnstone brought out that
there were pencil MARKS On the NiVi-
SON n-Weiskopf bill in Mr.. Cnristensen's
handwriting. Mr.. Lyon protested
against any improper imputations be-
ing made against the witness as the
figures merely showed the footings OF
the number Of labels.
He made the notations while work
ing On the famous Investigating COM
! mitttee. He did not, of his own know
ledge know whether Mr.. Boykin had
seen the invoice in question. He went
out and secured evidence and became
witness before the committee On the
label matter. He asked for bids from
the State and Walker, Evans & Cogs-
we'll, on the labels, because they were
practical men and were in that line of
business.
He and Mr.. Lyon and Mr.. Hay were
on the subcommittee to investigate
overcharges and prices.
Previous Testimony.
There was a prolonged legal de-
bate as to using certain testimony ad-
duced at the previous investigation re-
garding the identity Of the labels, The
court held that the question in the
record could not be used, but that Mr..
Christensen could give his testimony
by refreshing his memory.
The pencil memorandum in no wise
changed the original bill, but were
footings.
He figured, as shown by the pencil
memoranda on the bill, that the twen-
ty-one million labels would label S.
$4,000 worth of liquor.
Pencil Figures en- Invoice.
Merry legal tangle number forty
seven, more or less, as to whether it
was permissible evidence as to wheth-
er the witness could explain his pen
Gil figures On the, original invoice
which were made to show how much
liquor the labels would brand or mar
ket.
Mr.. Nelson, Mr.. Johnstone, Mr..
Welch, Mr.. Zimmerman, Mr.. Raysor,
all took a. turn at the Kick against Mr..
Christensen going into the purpose
of the pencil notations on the original
bill and that the figures are not part
of the invoice, and then an hour or
more was spent arguing on the COM
potency OF the prosecution offering the
evidence of Mr.. Christensen, in its
entirety, as offered before the inves-
tigation committee.
Col Abney Figures.
Col. B. L. ADney, of cousel for the
State, took a turn in the legal gym
naStics todav nm the question Of ad-