The Bottineau courant. (Bottineau, Bottineau County, N.D.) 1895-1929, 1921-03-17

showed that they had been guilty Of Z
gross interpolation Of facts, mlslaad-
ing Interpretation Of the law and mis-
reading Of records Into the evidance.
It - perhaps not strange that they
were afraid to appear, for cross en-.
animation before the senate commit,
tee"
Other witnesses who failed to obsy
summons were q. L. Bishop and II. A.
Smith Of the Bishop. Brissman audit
ing company. e. G. Lee and b. Z.
Altman. also employees Of the Bishop,
Brissman company, appeared. Both
disappeared when called upon again.
Altman after having undergone 4 try.
ing ordeal when. the accounting accur-
acy Of the Bishop, Brissman report
was riddled by 81. A. Paddock Of conn
sci, for the senate committee. Altman
| frequently reverted to the plea that
he had not seen the books Of the Drake
| mill when Mr.. Paddock pressed him
for an explanation Of his records. He
previously had testified, however, that
the audit was correct "as far % hui
| manly possible"
J.. r. Waters also refused to appear
before. the senate committee 'undeH
doctors ORDERS" The committee after
referring to his highly dramatic" tale
before the house committee, has this
to say Of all h eswitnesses who refused
to obey summons:
"All in all, the record Of these wit.
nesses who failed to appear, or who
ran away, would lead the unbiased
observer to believe that they were all
afraid that the light Of day and truth
would strike down the false barricades
they had prepared"
In its summary, the committee 70
i fers to Waters and ]. w. Brinton, the
latter formerly an employee Of Nom
partisan league enterprises:
"These men at one time enjoyed the
confidence Of such faithful servants
of the people as Governor Lynn j.
Frazier, William Lemke and John
Hagan. They apparently were heart
and soul for the Industrial program
until it was discovered by those who
were charged with the responsibility
for the programs success that they
We're using the positions they occupied
to further. their own interests. They
were not in the farmers movement be-
cause they believed in it, but for per-
sonal ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. They were
traitors to the cause they were sup
posed to espouse. When that was dis
covered they were no sooner ont than
they commenced to undermine and de-
stroy if they could the foundations OF
the industrial program which had been
enacted into law by hespeople Of this
state. Most OF the campaign thunder
which has been printed in the spapers
-~antagonistic to the industrial program
has been furnished by these men. On
their false testimony has-been based q
large part of the criticism Of the Bank
of North Dakota. BY the overWhelm-
ing testimony and the facts and cir
cumstances shown before this commit
tee 1t appears these mel have perjured
themselves.
1T lisa rule Of law that where q wit.
ness has. testified falsely, as to any
material fact in a matter under hives.
tigation, we have the right to dilre.
gard all testimony Of such witness nm
less his testimony Is corroborated by
other credible evidence Ia the matter
under investigation, or 81 facts and
circumstances proven. Applying such
rule 70 the testimony o. Waters and
Brinton. We feel that they having t.
tilted falsely upon several material,
matters. that their testimony \ abso-
lutely unworthy q any crsdence what
soever and should y totally di1rs.
sarded.n
14~&4
DAKOTA