Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1913-02-26
HOUSE ADOPTS REPORT SHOW
ING THAT FORMER DE
FENDER Is GUILTY.
Want HIM PROSECUTED
Ask Pittsburgh County Officials to
Vigorously Prosecute the
Attorney.
(BY j. \. NkEENERD
(Staff Correspondent.)

OKLAHOMA CITY, Feb. .5-(spe'
clal.) THE house of representatives,
adopted report made by the house
general committee on investigation
that finds Dr j. H. STOPPER guilty or
offcnscs that amount to eXtoruoh
within the meaning of the statutes
and that Dr. STOPPER should be prose
cuted therefor" Until Feb 10, of thn
year when he resigned, DR.. Stolpei
was a general attorney, or public
defender of the department of chari
ties and corrections, under appoint
ment by Miss Kate Barnard, the state
commissioner which position the
house has already passed bpl
abollshng.
After making the general findings,
the report continues:
Asks Prosecution.
therefore. since the offenses ir
that connection, if offenses they were
were committed in PittsburB county,
we hereby ask the county attorney or
Pittsburg county to file Information
against DR.. Stolper and prosecute him
for said offenses. as the said county
attorney may believe from the evil
dence. that he sair STOPPER has com
mltted."
Attention OF the county attorney OF
Oklahoma county is also directed III
the report to the official conduct or
DR.. Stolpcr amounting to "misfeasencc
or malfeasance in office"
secured Pardon.
The report was presented to tho
house by Mitchell of Garvin county.
and adopted on motion of Curtis OF
Seauoyah. This chief finding agains'
Stolper who resigned as public de-
fender" while being investigated by
the committee Is in connection with
pardons issued in favor Of Pete silva
and John Silva both of krebs, VINO
had been convicted for violations OF
the prohibition law. The report finds
that in September 1911, Stolper, APP
peared before Acting Gov. j. j. Nc
Alester, representing that he did so
as a representative of the Charities
department. and urged pardon be
issued in favor of Pete Silva. Upon
the official representations of Stol-
per the report says the pardon was
issued, and placed In the hands OF
Stolper for delivery to the convicted
men. Before delivering the pardon
to Pete Silva. the report says, STOPPER
required Silva to deliver to him (Stol-
per) a note for three hundred dol
lars owing by the public defender to
Silva, and required the payment OF
seventy-five dollars additional under
threat that if the demand was not
complied with the pardon would be
returned to the governors office. The
report shows that Silva surrendered
the note and the money
Another Deal.
The acting governor in September
1911 also issued pardon to John
Silva, and Stolper. the report shows
learning of this asked to be permitted
to deliver the pardon to Silva. In de-
livering the pardon STOPPER, accord
ing to the report, represented that he
(Stolper) wos forced to pay one hun
dred dollars at the governors office
in order to obtain the pardon. John
Silva being unable to pay the cash
made a note to Stolper, the report
shows. in the sum of one hundred
dollars
Much Expense Money.
The committees finding in regard
to Stolper's expense accounts as pub
lie defender reveals an interesting
state Of facts. From July /, 1911 and
December 81, 1912, Stolper spent
s4194.15 according to expense ac-
counts filed with the Charities de-
partment and which were paid out of
state funds. OF .his amount $3.50
was used in travelling within the state,
and s537 outside the state, three hun
dred dollars for stamps. $685. for
stenographic help and sl77 gor tele-
phonng and telegraphing We're some
of the items. The committee report
says:
"As to much of this expense and
the necessity therefor, DIR. STOPPER was
unable to explain to our satisfaction
We find his expense account shows
433 railroad fares. or practically one
for every working day of the perioF
covered. about four hundred bus
fares at twenty-five cents each, 29V
pullman fares, 76 items of steno'
graphic hire, but he could give the
name of only one stenographer tt
whom he made these payments, anc
was not certain as to that one. Stol'
per had taken no receipts to verify
his charges.
The committee also found that th'
ont of state travels included three
trims TO Washington, three to kansa!
City. and numerous other places. The
committee finds that the expenses Of
the public defender both within an(
without the state were "inexcusiabl,
extravagsnt, and largely useless ex
penditure" the galloping over th'
slate and part of the continent OF
every pretext of official duty, whicf
ought not to be tolerated in this Of
a.t,o, ,,,biio affipeb