The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1921-10-21

, members nt council % Homer C. Craso
; 20 the office % r.;v manager. and. sec
! ord, tha. ,asy believed tina, Besscmer
! Nal, with ether. ;nd,ctcl by the recent
! grand jury. We're gully OF the frauds
: altered I, have been committed. Attor-
| nry R!:z had the remaining ten VII
ness., caliri t,r tho afternoon brought
! into court and sworn at one time 4he
, w,,nesscS were excluded again and MT
R.tz mazda the rnitow!ug "Tcr. sapror'-
81 tv suggestions f;um Attorney } -
I. OBriea:
Tho defense offers N show tina: each
.. thu following witnesses. Harry kirhE'
". Il. Stump. J. /. ErnnF' bert l."
walmslcS. William r, lSiese EIio''
Eskrv, commonly ca!lel Doc Fakey' MA
ex-",ty policeman. II. j. clark E'wooI
n, nsrha Ralph Spears and \. H.
Foster Is a resident OF the cit% az
Wheeling: tina: - permitted TO testify
they VII swear that each Ok them -
Interested N circulating petitions 'nT
thn REGAL. OF Homer I. Crego. the presen.
cit~ manager: that each Of them ne
Neves Ina. fraud ami irregularities weEo
rerretratel IN tho last C!;% election. ana
rha; rs result the e.ert.On % mo
rrescn; members - ely rounc!. "aS
erected. and thai each and OIL OK 'hetn
arc circulating petitions ~ arc !H'eres''
ed ~ having others Circulate prN''ons
fn- the recall cf III" said c"u'ici.neh ana
40 SAID city manager. ana tnat '"o
s,,l re.!t.ous are be!uE s!sred b. nu-
nervous voters IN 'he ".ty O. Nhee''ns
and shat copy OF the said petition los
~. -acau q, the city manage: and men,
h.rs u council appears IN :: newspaper
article offered here N evidence. and sp-
rearing n the Wheeling News TIE eu'-
ION OF SUNDAY. October Ii. more tut.S
described II the Offer q! the SAID news
paper IN evidence
Rejected by Court.
Objection 10 .he orfer was made by the
states attorneys. Judge Robinson an
nourced that the Offer was rejected. 70
which ruling the defense took objection.
Just before this offer was made. Al
tornev Ritz throuSh III" testimony o.
u. N. Evans Of the Island, FORMER
civ chief accountant. offered 10 ldehti!N
two petitions appearing IN the SUNDAY
News article referred T. above as copies
OF the petitions now being circulated ny
Mr.. Evans and others for the recall o.
the counc!lnen and CO manager. On
tho states objection this oner was re-
fused and the defense excepted. MI
RITZ offered the article containing the
coptes OF the petition In evidence,
which was rejected. The court arcepteu
on otrer Of the defense OF an article In
the Same issue e: ~" Sunday News
oeaded Thompson Jury Is stu Hope
lessly Deadlocked" when the stat" an
rounced that there was no Objection TO
this offer.
An orte- similar ~ cha; made &C zen
witnesses "a n group was mace through
W. NJ. Evans before that witness was
excused. The offer was rejected.
The las, offer made by the der~Sse be-
fore cour. adjourned las: evening ~aS
that OF the TRANSCRIPT OF IL" Gamma
ton ct Nenircman Harry .Sh'"nnam-
me- when he was being questioned ~ i
pro3r ec,!ve juror IN the cas-" .os t:r"
CHIEF Thompson. Court StenoCrap hcr
Louis Schrader was sworn to MAKE
true transcript OF Leightenhamm"" ex-
animation. which will be read for tn"
court this morning.
Could Give Pair Trial.
or all the witnesses called to '"St!'N
IN behalf OF Nails motion 70" q Cn"nG"
of venue yesterday afternoon not "nH
would say that. IL accepted and sworn
as 4 juror. he could no; give IL" defend
ant a Gar t:ial. when subjected {" r:os'
examination either b. Prosecuting At
=.
prosccutnr Austin V. Wood. Most az
these Witnesses gave th!s testimony on
cross examination. notwithstanding N"
fact that they we're connected wth "A"
circulation ard council and city manacer
recall net;tiors One witness Arthur
Ingram. said ke vou,d not qualify as
Juror Sc 'eral others said ;hey believed
fraud was pra"t.ced in TIE lily election.
but that they have not made up their
minds as TO who - guilty 90 pcrpetrai-
ting the frauds
David Parrish former city police
man. was tho first witness called 10 the
stand when cnu-: rscoI"ened a: tw1
O'Clock Yesterday afternoon. Questioned
BY Mr.. Ri:z. he stated that he ts cap
tain" IN charge oc the recall petitions in
the Fourth ward. lie received twenty
petitions Re said. separate petitions for
the recall OF the eteNen members OF
council, and the city manager.
Questioned as to whom he had en-
ployed to carry the petitions around 10 ,
tho voters, Parrish named his licuten-
ants as John Nau. Doc" Eskcy. Joe
Holmes, Howard Watson and Charlie
Young
Asked 10 produce the petitions which
he had in his possession hearing names
of voters wro havo affixed their sigma
lures. Mr.. Parrish said:
Il turned them over to 8. N. Noyes
within tho last hour"
At the request OF the defense. Judge
Robinson issued a forthwith summons
FOR Mr.. Moves who Is credited with be- Q
ing the chairman OF the recall commit
tee, representing the Good Goverrmen;
LEAGUE and the Ohio County League o:
Women Voters. A deputy sheriff was
JI.netrheI tn serNe ;hA subpoena Of Mr..
Moves
Did you call on your lIeutsnants 20 .
see how many names they had on their ;
petitions? or DID they report 70 yVu?"
Attorney Ritz asked NJ Parrish.
They reported 20 me.
Who Of them reported to YOU"
All OF them :.
How many s.gners did Nau report" ,
About aS.'
And Holmes
He and Nau worked together"
How many did Watson report~ |
Il think il was Us.
And Young
He end Esk"y worked together. 7 ,
th!nx. IN all. We got about 2I5 sigma !
lures"
Il your work finally done
yes
Why arc YOU doing this work"
II think they ouCh; t. DO recalled" |
Why"
For several reasons.
We'll. what arc your reasons"
An objection by the sta'e WAS sus- !
,ainsd. J
mfr. Parrish" Attorney O'Br.en asked.
Parrish. do you know the city man.
1Ser9'
IT wouldn't know him to sec him"