Audubon County journal. (Exira, Iowa) 1884-1993, 1920-03-25
Sen. NEWBERRY
FOUND GUILTY
Convicted by Jury Of Crimina!
Conspiracy in Campaign
of 1918.
IL OTHERS FOUND GUILTY.
verdicts Also Returned Against Paul
King, Campaign Manager, and John
S. Newberry-case on Trial for
Eiah. Weeks.

drdlu INdplQS, Men,, March 2Z.-
Senator Truman FL. Newberry was
guilty of criminal conspiracy in the
campaign of 1918, according to ver-
dict returned in United States district
court here. The case has been on
trial for eight weeks, starting with
123 active defendants and finishing
with S5.
Verdicts of guilty also were returned
against Paul King, Charles Floyd,
Frederick Cody and e. v. Chilson.
Seventeen Found Guilty.
The following were found guilty.:
Roger M. Andrews, Menominee; Ell
bert V. Chilson, Ann Arbor; Frederick
Cody, New York B. Frank Emery, De-
troit; Richard II. Fletcher, Bay City;
Charles A. Floyd, Detroit; Fred Henry
Flint; Hannibal A. Hopkins, st. Clair;
Paul ii. King, Detroit; George S. Ladd,
Strubridge, Mass. James f. McGregor,
Detroit; William ]. Nickel, Oshkosh,
Wis; Truman H. Newberry, Detroit;
John S. Newberry, Detroit; Milton
Oakman, Detroit; Allan A. Templeton,
Detroit; Harry o. Turner, Detroit.
All other defendants were found not
guilty. Judge Sessions will pass sem
tence at p. m.
Revealed Scandal.
Government officials asserted that
the testimony presented to the grand
jury had revealed political scandal
that in many respects was without
parallel in American annals.
1t was alleged that voters were
bribed, election boards corrupted, edi-
tors subsidized and moving picture
theaters bought up in the endeavor to
defeat Henry Ford first in the pri-
maries of both parties, and later, when
he had won the Democratic nomina-
ton in the election, itself.
| Officials were a bit secretive as to
how the alleged conspiracy was uncov-
cred, but a general outline of their
methods was made available. 1t was
revealed that an attempt was made to
repeat the suspected tactics Of the
| Newberry campaign.
Under this plan corps of investi-
gators were sent into the state under
direction of Earl j. Houck, who, with
Frank G. Daley, special assistant to
the attorney general was the central
figure in the election fraud cases Of
Terre Haute, Indianapolis, Evansville
and Frankfort, Ind. These cases, be-
ginning in 1915, resulted in some 200
convictions.
Daley and Houck came to Michigan
last August. Bank records were in!
spected and the visitors lists of safety,
deposit vaults gone over. With the
tale of these as a starter, the investi-
gators were sent out. They visited,
small fry" politicians first, offering.
them vague hints of what might come
4 from a mythical campaign of a certain!
Michigan politician. Objections to-
small returns We're followed by "con-
fidential'; comparisons with the New
berry campaign.
/ Underlings Fall Into Trap. .
Generally, it was said, these lesser
political leaders fell into the traps,
telling what they had received and
explaining who sought to handle the
i money" in given wards or towns. The
next grade of political leader was
then approached, and by this method,
it was state, a clear track was blazed
to the "higher ups"
When brought into the grand jury
room and confronted with accurate ac-
counts of their conversation with the
agents the men generally, it was said,
repeated their stories.
The governments legal experts,
headed by Mr.. Daley, Dale Souter of
Grand Rapids, former assistant dis
trict attorney, and Oliver Pagan, in
dictment expert for the department. Of
justice, took both state and federal
laws as the basis for the indictments.
The federal corrupt practices act Of
1910 limits the expenditures Of sena-
torial candidates to $4,000, and re-
quires that four statements be filed
with the secretary of the senate, one
preceding and following first the pri-
mary and then the election. The New
berry affidavit cited in the second in
dictment was filed in correspondence
with this act.
Invoke Federal Bribery Law.
The second federal corrupt practices
act, which the indictments alleged was
violated, was passed in October, 1910.
1t made bribery of voters crime after
several federal courts held that such
an act was not an offense against the
laws of the United States. This law
came into being after the Michigan
primary, but just before the election
The state laws We're brought in be-
cause the act of 1910 provides that
if state limits campaign expendi.
/. lures to less than the $4,000 named
in that act, then the state law shall
apply to campaigns within that COM
monwealth. AS it happens the Michf-
, gan statutes limit campaign expendi-
lures to fourth of the yearly salary
of the position sought for each primary
or election campaign. An aspirant for
, United States senator in this state NAV.
, therefore, it was argued, spend only
$1,S75 on the primary and an equal
amount on the election campaign.