Omaha daily bee., 1912-01-30
Published Words Called in Question
by Council Members.
ARTER MAKES DIRECT CHARGE
Accuses Unnamed City Officials Of
Misconduct in Office.
WARM DAY IN COUNCIL CHAMBER
inaairy Into Paving and other Pub
lie works Bring. Out n Lot
OF Statements from
Contractors.

A placid investigation into the letting OF |
public improvement contracts In Omaha
became charged With ominous political
intent whea Ralph Il. Sunderland Of the /,
Cstisens' union was brought before the !
city council. convened as special court /,
Of inquiry yesterday afternoon. suuder- !
land was accompanied by legal adviser. /,
who ohjected TO all important questions
proRounded by councilmen or city at /
torney. such objections were sustained
and passive observers became active |
protestors y
Mr.. Sunderland's published statement
that II II significant observation that
no public attack has been made upon
the Citizens union nor upon Individual.
connection With IT, except by persons
In close proximity to the city hall. or by /,
those who fear that corrupt machine con-
troll Of Omaha is doomed" started the !,
trouble. Through his attorney he politely !
refused to explain what he meant, ths
lawyer saying 1t was irrevelant. imma-
tefial and didn't matter much. anyway. =
| A few OF tile councilmen saw Il from
The lawyers standpoint. others took -
dlametrlcally opposite view and there
after considerable unquiet prevailed Many /
questions wsre propounded and all were
met by the calm, determined objection otl
counsel for the witness.
Course OF the Inaairy.
'Confine the examination 10 the paving
proposition said the attorney. His adj
vice was followed, but the witness pro-
tcssed ignorance OF the business Of the
firm as far as such details as pacing
was concerned.
"If there's any corrupt Official around.
I'D like to find Il out" complained City
Clerk Butler. GIVE us what information
YOU have. .
Counsel obieteed
DO you know" auerled Joe Butler. as
slstant IN the office OF the gas commis.
sloner that James Jensen has assigned
rights undsF eontrsssz 10 yeuF'
.iso yoa nsan,r asked -ths witness adj,
dressing The city attorney, that warrants
have been ASSIGNED 70 usI's I'll
Mr.. Rlne said rights under the con-
,rscts had besl assigned by James Jen-
sen TO the Sunderland Bros. firm"
| isn't It fact" continued Mr.. Butler.i
that Nj. Jensen has assigned something
like $4,000 TO your
objection was made by the attorney
| II Just wanted 10 show" said Butler.
that no men have been closer TO the adj
mlnistration nor have been larger ben-l
eflciaries than Sunderland rf3os."
Judge Rsrka ruled the proceedings outl
Of order and yanked The Investigation
back Into the paving probe channels.
bu, nothing was discovered, the witness
protesting that his brother, ]. A. Sun
derland. who is now out OF the city. was
the man to examine.
Arter Makes n Charge.
Direct charges Of misconduct on the
part OF an unnamed city official were
made By A. A. Arter, an employe OF c.
r. Tanning and q paving district pro-
moter
81 do not care TO go any further
said Mr.. AFTER until l have seen a.
lawyer. I'm not afraid OF incrlminating
myself. but I want TO know how far
ought TO go
Although inslstent the council wasl
unable to learn who the official who
had improperly conducted himself was.
! Questioned as to whether he was \
member OF the city council or a minorl
employe Of the administration Arter
steadfastly declined to answer until he
had consulted an attorney. He will
appear before the committee at o'cioek
this afternoon and tell his story. assisted
by legal talent
| Promoters Accuse One Another.
| Promoters placed on the stand accused
each other very generously with wronzl
doing in securing signatures to petitions.
| T. 8. crocker, promoter OF public im-l
| provements." cited an instance where
certain promoter whose name he gave
had forged q date on a petition subse-
quent 10 the date Of signing. He is noe
certain IL the contract for the work had
been let on the strength OF this PEI
\ tition.
I Emil Peterson accused an employe u
ic. f. ranning with violating the city
ordinances in promising to pay a prop
erty -holder the difference in cost OF two
paving materials II he would attach his
signature to his petition Placed on the
stand the employo denied the charge.
C. Z. Tanning gave list Of the pros