The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1911-12-11
Feature of Session in Board
Meeting Monday Was a
Clash Between Attorneys
Kelley and Feemster.
KELLEY is CALLED
LIAR BY FEEMSTER
However the Use of the
Short and Ugly" Word
Did Not Provoke Trouble
Trial in a Few Days.

Personalities were INDUCED in Mon
day morning, in the reopening of the
temperance fight in Jackson township
before the board of county commits
sioners, when attorney A. r. Feemster
of Cambridge City, as a remonstrator,
squared off and accused Attorney w.
H. Kelly of this city, who Is repre-
senting the "wets,' of having told the
commissioners an untruth.
Red of face, Attorney Kelley answer
ed there is no need of calling any
one a liar, or indulging in personali-
ties" and both sides composed them
selves and proceeded with the join
ing of issues in order that the question
as the legality of the blanket remon-
STRANGE, which became effective, June
3, 1910, might come to a trial in the
commissioners court.
Practically the entire day was TAX
en- up in the argument as to the ne
cessity of the issues which the tenn.
perance faction, through Attorneys
Feemster, Jessup and White, offered
in reply to the papers filed by Roy H.
Fraunberg, the Cambridge City hoste-
ler, asking that the remonstrance be
set aside and a license to retail liquors
granted him. The trial date, it was
anticipated, would be set late in the
afternoon. In all probability the trial
will commence either late this week
or the first of next week.
Remonstrancs Attacked.
The attack which Fraunberg makes
on the legality of the remonstrance,
filed a week ago by his attorneys, w.
H. Kelley and o. G. Bolden, of In
dianapolis, is in five paragraphs. The
"drys'' answered the first paragraph
by asking that it be made more speci-
fic and filing interrogatories as to
whether Julius P. Knipe, Finton L.
Terrence, w. F. Medsker and Joshua
Terrence had not signed the reman-
STRANGE in person and not through a
power of attorney. The "wets" grant
ed these. four had signed the remon-
STRANGE and withdrew their names
The other side waived the question OF
making the petition more specific.
When paragraph two was taken up,
in which it is alleged Albert Ogborn,
Park T. Hiser, Albert Tyles and Hugh
Morris were minors and therefore
could not legally sign the remon.
STRANGE, the trouble arose. The ''drys''
denied the allegation of Fraunberg
that these four were minors.
Taking up the matter attorney Kel.
ley informed the board that the
"drys" admitted the contention OF the
"wets" that Ogborn and the other
three were minors. The statement was
instantly challenged by attorney
Feemster, who as a remonstrator, at.
tested to the truth of the afidavits
filed in connection with issues by the
"drys." From his seat between attor-
neys Jessup and White, red with an.
ger, he arose, thrust one arm in his
coat pocket, edged toward Attorney
Kelley and told him he had told an
untruth.
Just for a few minutes the situa-
ton was very tense. With Attorney
Kelley's reply, however, matters ad-
justed themselves and personalities
were eliminated.
A General Denial.
To paragraph three the "drys" filed
answer in general denial to the claims
of the "wets" that w. L. Beck and
twenty six others were not legal vot-
ers when they signed the remon-
STRANGE. Demurers are filed to the rep.
resentations in paragraphs four and
five. In four the "wets" set forth that
John J. Bell and forty-seven others by
fraudulent statements on the part of
the dry" leaders were induced to
sign the blanket remonstrance In the
last paragraph Fraunberg asserts
Thos. Winders was bribed, James
Speed was intimidated and HaIleck
Floyd, Gilbert Crosley. Ebert Hud.
Jacob E. Wright and James
SIOOuNlu SlSuSu tue IeuOuSlIAuCG
twice. In the demurrers the attorneys
for the temperance faction declares
that the legality as to the signatures
of these demonstrators cannot be rails
ed on the ground of fraud. az con-
Germs the interests Of Fraunberg, but
that in event fraud was practiced,
which the "drys" deny. it would only
be available to those against whom it
was practised.
The demurrers present the only
questions of legal significance, the
question raised in the other para
graphs relating entirely to questions
OF fact
The action by Ffaunberg is the
same AZ though he had Instituted 642
law suits in the commissioners court
All OF the gignerS to the remonstrance
are made codefendents, and each win
have to aDpear-in cosEt- md testify.