The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1913-10-07

recommendation by the governor to
President Wilson that Meany be ap-
pointed to an Enthusiastically.
Attorney Human stated that little OF
no evidence would be offered by the
defence in answer TO articles three
four, five. seven and eight. These
charge bartering political Influence, at
tempting to influence the stock market
by legislation, the bribery of witnesses
and the suppression of evidence The
court has already ruled out testimony
offered regarding the governors al
legged attempts to barter his political
influence and the other articl IS were
touched only lightly by evidence Of
fered by the board of managers.
Lack of Evidence
"As we view it," he said, 1T is not
a question of the 'probative' force or
value of the evidence. but a ease where
there Is an utter lack of evidence sup
porting the charges, or from which any
inference against the respondent can
legitimateiy be drawn. We will leave
these articles with the evidence or the
lack of evidence relating thereto for
the court to pass upon at such time az
1t seems advisable"
In connection with this part of the testi-
mony Human charged counsel for the
board of managers with using unfair
tactics and making unWarranted 1nSlnua-
tions throughout the trial.
although there is an entire lack CT
evidence in support of any one of these
five articles of impeachment" he said,
and although there Is not in the case
anything from which even ans Inference
can be drawn in support of the allegations
therein contained it is equally true that
this case from the beginning has been
filled with insinuations and innuendoes,
,fk.Ix
leading, but which of necessity tended to
befog the case and to divert the atten-
ton not only OF the court, but of the
public as well from the real issues in
yolyed
Take Up Articles
The attorney then took UP articles ],
and 6, on which he indicated counsel for
the governor would make their strongest
fight. The charges brought in the art
icles and Humans answers follow in
part.
Article THAT the governor made a
false statement regarding his campaign
expenses and thereby concealed certain
contributions.
Sulzer knowing the sentiment and feel
ing of the donors toward him. believed
many of the gifts were intended Tor q II
personally, to be used in his campaign
If needed or to be applied to his personal
SAptlStS. Mdny VI tncnt
were handled by clerks and by Louis A.
Sarecky, his campaign secretary, that
Sulzer had no personal knowledge of the
gifts. Not until after the election did
Sarecky learn that il would be necessary
TO make out statement of expenditures,
and, having kept no account of all the
expenditures, he had TO depend on his
memory regarding many of them. When
he finally submitted the statement to
the no without raoninO
Sareckys assurance that il was "all
right and with no thought of falsifying
signed it and swore to its truthfulness.
Article 2-That in swearing to the cam
paign statement the governor committed
perjury.
Nowhere does the law say that can
didate shall tell what money he receives
during the campaign. Only a statement
showing expenditures is demanded. None
has questioned the governors expendi-
lures, therefore his affidavit meets every
requirement of law and he is no way
guilty of perjury
Article 6-That in converting campaign
contributions to his personal use. the gov
ernor was guilty of larceny
Only the persons who contributed money
to Sulzer could bring him into court on
such a charge Even the donor could
only ask the return of the gift and then.
if this we're refused. only civil proceed
ings could be brought. No donor has yet
asked the return of her elft. To
urge the impeachment of public official