The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1913-10-01
SUFFERS TRIAL On
GOVERNOR BREAKS EVEN ON TIE
FIBST Two DAYS
TESTIMONY IS HEARD

TESTIMONY Is HEARD
1 Witnesses Say There Was No Strings
Tied to Contributions and Cover
nor Was Free to Use Them as He
Pleased Judge Rules to Admit All
Testimony.
Wednesdays testimony marked the
opening Of the actual trial Of William
Suizer, the impeached executive Of
New York, which until noon Wednes-
day had been delayed by arguments
of objections of counsel for the de-
fense. At that hour all obstacles to
the taking of testimony had been
swept aside by vote of the court,
thereby permitting Eugene Lamb
Richards of counsel for the managers
Of the impeachment to outline the
evidence against the governor. This
opened the case. The last Of these
obstacles-the motion OF the defence
to quash the three articles OF the
Impeachment dealing with the gov
ernor's alleged misuse of his cam
paign contributions-was disposed of
in this manner: Presiding Judge Cul-
len overruled the motion without pre-
judice to it's merits and recommend
ed that decision be reversed until the
testimony was all in. This recon-
| mendation was adopted by the court
by a vote of 49 to Z. The negative
votes all were cast by Democratic SEN
ators.
The first witness was then put be-
fore the judges. Gov. Sulzer was free
to use the s2,500 check given him
by Jacob H. Schiff, New York bank
er, in any way he chose. The banker
so declared on the witness stand at
the impeachment trial of the COVER
| nor. The designation of the check
across it's back as contribution to
the governors campaign fund did not
restrict its use to that purpose, Mr..
Schiff said.
Henry Morganthau, ambassador to
Turkey, formerly chairman of the
finance committee Of the National
Democratic committee, testified that
when he gave the governor check
for s1,000-a personal contribution
he had placed no limitations on its
use. He said, however, that he had
made the gift to help the governor in
his campaign and had been "foolishly
generous. These are two of the al
legged campaign contributions which
the articles of impeachment against
the governor charge that he misused.
On Thursday Jacob H. Schif, the
banker, was recalled, and he testified
that he was recently asked by Samuel
7. Frankenstein, a former law part
ner Of Gov. Sulzer, if he would accept
the return Of the alleged $4,000 cam
paign contribution which the banker
Wednesday said he gave to the gov
ernor without restriction as to its
use. Mr.. Schit said he had replied
negatively.
The high court, by an unanimous
vote Thursday decided to admit all
testimony pertaining to campaign
contributions made to the governor
even though they were not specified
in the articles of impeachment. This
ruling paved the way for the intro
duction of evidence intended to show
the governor had solicited and recelV-
ed large contributions from brewing
interests.
Counsel for the impeachment man
ayers said they were prepared to
prove the governor received campaign
contributions vastly in excess" OF
the total mentioned in the articles OF
Impeachment. There were more than
100 not accounted. for, counsel as
serted. The names OF large num-
Der of these contributors, other than
those Of the brewing interests, we're
brought into the evidence. These in
cluded SO persons mentioned as
drawers Of Sulzer checks, in the ac-
count of Louis A. Sarecky, the gov
ernor's campaign secretary, in the
Mutual Alliance Trust company.
This account showed, with checks and
cash, that deposits Of S14,40O had
been made between September TO-,
1919 and the date Of the governors
Inauguration.
Decision on the question as to
whether Suffers alleged misuse Of
checks given him without restriction
as to their use constituted larceny
was reserved to give the court an op-
portuaitFto Investigate the authorl-
ties.
The question to the admissibility of
the evidence Oh campaign contribu-
tions not cited in the articles If i'm
peachment pTecipitated a heated
wrangle among the attorneys.
"These transactions hundred or
= more in number, 'A asserted John B.
stanchfeld, counsel for the prosecu-
ltion, constituted a common scheme,
design on the part Of the respon-
dent to display certain contributions
and conceal others. I can see that
I the failure to report one might have
I been an accident; two coincidence,
but to fail to account for a hundred
lis a crime"
/ Attorneys for the governor protest
led that the articles should be treated
-: 49, q :, IN dintrnent and that the goY-