The times and democrat. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1881-current, 1911-03-04
They WERE PAID
(Continued from first page.)

pldlu III GU iiANSt'hS W -
on the 21st of June following the
election. The second meeting was on
the 18th of July. Both meetings
were held in St. Louis. At the first
the testimony OF Beckemeyer and
White and Link shows distribution
of $1,000 each to the followers OF
Browne in Southern Illinois, and at
the second meeting, the 18th OF
July, the testimony of the same men
shows distribution of $500 each to
the followers of Browne in Southern
Illinois.
A year after the second meeting
was held, and when inquiry cane t.
be made regarding the paymen. If
money to these members of thH Leg
islature at that meeting, false and
fictitious and manufactured explana-
ton of the purpose of the meeting
was made up. Two OF the men. hers
who were there testified to Wilson,
who went there as Brownies agenr
and, they say, distributed the money,
sending them letters in 1910, OIL the
eve CT the inquiry, dated back prior
to the 18th of July, 1909, and sug-
gestlng as a reason for the meeting
a proposal to give banquet 10 Mr..
Browne.
Unfortunately nearly all the wit
nesses to the meeting forgot that
there was any proposal to give
banquet to Mr.. Browne. All the
members of the Browne following
met at their customary meeting
place in St. Louis, brought from
their several homes in different and
distant towns in the southern part
of the State Of Illinois, called there
by tele?rams for scme purpose Or
other, and there appears in th2 @estl-
mony regarding that meeting I'D evi-
dence whatever as to any conclusion
reached, any question raised or any
action taken regarding the giving OF
banquet to Mr. Browne.
There is another fact whi2h cor.
roborates most powerfully the testi-
mony showing that there was money
paid, fund distributed at the July
lis meeting; and that is that two
of the men who were there when
called before the Grand Jury Of
/ Cook County in an inquiry as to leg
islavive corruption testified under
oath that they were not present al
the meeting perjured themselves to
conceal the fact that they were there
at ALL They were indicted for that
perjury. Why, if the meeting was
an innocent one, if it was a meeting
to talk about banquet, if the tes-
timony of these three men that there
was fund distributed there is false,
and it was an innocent meeting, why
should men be willing to commit
perjury in order to conceal the fact
that they were there?
The corruption in the Legislature
of Illinois which brought on the dis
tribution of July IS was practically
admitted upon this hearing. When
| the first testimony about that meet
ling was produced the counsel for
Mr.. Lorimer objected to it because,
he stated, it vas testimony about
what they called the Jackpot" The
corruption in that Legislature had
continued So :a2g, mems minds had
N, o1 hn1ioVin a.
in it, men had become SO callous to
the iniquity OF it, that they joked
about it and nicknamed it as II 1t
were a matter for jocular treatment.
Several of the witnesses testified that
they called it "jack-pot.'
White and Lick and 8eckemeyer
all have sworn :hat on the 21st day
of June Mr. Browne paid to them
$1,000 each, and two OF them testi-
fy to that payment being pursuant
to promises made by Browne TO them
before the election of Lorimer. Upon
what ground are we to reject the
testimony of these three witnesses
and accept the testimony of Lee
O'Neil Browne. which we already
know to be false, because he denies,
denies under cath, as we know,
falsely, the disposition of the jack
pot? 1t appears that upon uncontra-
dicted and indisputable testimony
in this case, that the collector, The
distributor, the leader in this corrup-
ton Of the Legislature of Illinois
was Lee O'Neil Browne.
There is one other circumstance
which is little aside from the main
current of this sewer which we have
been considering, and that Is the
bribery of Holtslaw. Mr.. Holtslaw
was, prior to the meeting of the AS
sembly Of Illinois of 1909, in which
he was a Senator, reputable man,
of good standing in the community in
which he lived Ee testifies that
about the 18th of June, or just be-
fore the 18th of June, he was sent
for by Mr.. Broderick to come to his
place of business in Chicago.
He testifies that was either by let
ter or telegram, and that he went
there; that Mr.. Broderick handed
him S2,500 in package and he took
it and went away. Broderick at the
same time telling him there would
be more for him later. He went
away, and H. wen: to the State Bank
Of Chicago and deposited this $4,000
in the name of his bank, the Holstlaw
Ranlc Of Ink The aShinr of the