Evening star., 1924-01-10
MATHEWS DENIES HE
ATTACKED DRY CHIEF
Attorney Says Notes of Schrick
Trial at Indianapolis Will
Reveal Truth.
APPEARANCE NOT VOLUNTARY
Declares United States Senator Can
Corroborate His Evidence.

Jerry A. Mathews of this city today
took issue with Prohibition Commits
sioner Haynes. and denied that in ap-
pearfng before the federal court at
indianapolis last Thursday in the case
of Michael Schrick, brewer, he had
attacked and criticized prohibition Of
Hcials. for promising Immunity" from
prosecution.
THE transcript of the official re-
porter's notes will show" said Mr..
Mathews. in statement made public
today, that 1 criticized no one, and
certainly imputed no unworthy mo-
tive to the government agencies"
Commissioner Haynes had criticized
Mathews in letter to Federal Judge
Anderson, made public recently, in
which the commissioner said Mathews
statement before the court that pro-
hibition officials here had promised
his client tSchrick) immunity from
criminal prosecution was incorrect"
Mr. Haynes declared the settlement of
$4,000 in Mr.. Schrick's case was a
compromise of civil liability"
Charges "Undeserved Notoriety.,
Mr.. Mathews charges he has been
given some undeserved notoriety,"
and counters with the statement that
a CcTtdlH prOHtDlllOH OII1cer, a Mr..
Andrews" had personally promised
no immunity" for Schrick, but stated
that Commissioner Haynes had de-
cided, in view of the heavy penalty
paid by, Schrick; not to recommend
criminal action
MY appearance before Judge An
derson," said Mr.. Mathews, was not
voluntary. Mr.. Schrick was repre-
sented by other counsel. The infer
ence from the press reports is that 1
vent before Judge Anderson as "a
Friend of the court and voluntarily
attacked prohibition enforcement off,
GERS. The transcript of the official
reporters notes will show that 1 crit
iclzed no one and certainly imputed
no unworthy motive to the govern
Identified HNfr. Andreyys..
The only reference TO any pro-
hihition officer that I recall was
when Judge Anderson asked me to
identify a Mr.. Andrews to whom
Shrek had referred as the officer in
the prohibition unit who had told him
that Prohibition Commissioner Haynes
mad consented, in view of Shrek s
payment of an agreed sum in pen
atty, not to recommend criminal
prosecution. 1 referred to Mr. An
drews by name and official title in
ord supports this statement
MY recollection of the alleged as
sUrances given to Schrick by Mr.. An
urew3 COMEDIES with that of Mr.
Schrick and also Of Newton H. Myers
a promin ent business man of Indiana
and Chicago, who has been in turn
postmaster. mayor Of Jeffersonville
ana delegate to the republican ma
uonal convention of 1920.
Mr.. Andrews personally promised
no immunity, but stated accor riding to
our recollection. that Commissioner
daynes had decided, in view Of the
heaEy penalty paid by Schrick. not to
recommend criminal action This
staten ent of the attitude of Com
missioner Haynes toward the Schrick
case is corroborated. by a United
states senator, who. at the request
OF SchrlckS attorney, a constituent
or the senator. arranged for the lat
ters appearance at the prohibition
unit This senator advised the pro-
hibltlon unit before the case came
up at indianapolis that Commissioner
Haynes had come to the CauitoI ana
voluntarily stated that he had com
promised the case and would not
recommend or initiate any criminal
proceedings.
Happened Two Years Ago.
Il concede that honest men may
differ as to their recollection of
events nearly two wears old The
prohibition unit waited nearly two
Years and then brought the matter
10 the attention of the United States
attorney At the request of Mr..
Myers. a friend of twenty years
standing, had undertaken tc
straighten out the final adjustmen.
before the prohibition office OF Mr.
Schrick's affairs. following tho ac
oeptance of his offer of compromisf
relating to a lease of his brewer .