The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1927-11-14
Signer of the Perjured
Affidavit Blanes Burns
lContinNed from Paqe Onel

It is very plainly intimated by the
prosecution that Burns come out bad
ly in this little quarrel between oil
companies. He will probably be
charged with subornation to commit
perjury, in that he caused one OF his
detectives known to him as "Wm. v.
Long" to make the untrue affidavit
stating that the detective had fol-
lowed the car of Norman Glasscock,
Juror in the Fall-Sinclair Teapot
Dome oil graft trial out to a flying
field, where he saw in disguise AS
sistant Attorney General H. R. Lamb,
who talked with the juror. Lamb
was identified by the physical de
N, ;ption given of him and by his car
licaNse number.
Hired To Do Perjury.
The district attorney conducting
the inquiry into the fixing" of the
Burns Sinclair trial jury now says
that "Long" is really VIM. V. Nc
Mullan, an ex-army officer, former
insurance "adjust En-" who in some
way unexplained, was able to go to
work for VIM J. Burns on Oct. 10,
and by Oct. Is was so well trusted by
him that he was hired by the prom
Use of a "bonus" to make several false
reports on Juror Glasscock, and
Lamb, and sign the false affidavit,
which VIM. J. Burns not only claims
to have presented to the trial judge
but which he actually presented, I'M
der oath, to the grand jury, tho he
knew it was absolutely untrue, and
had been drawn up by Long" in con-
sultation with Burns and his lieu
tenants to fit the occasion.
PinchOt In 1t.
Ex-Governor Clifford Pinchot of
Pennsylvania is involved in the case,
Long" or MCMILLAN, according to the
governors statement, having been
sent to the district attorneys office
by Pinchot during the first days of
the detectives stay in Washington.
Governor Pinchot, who halls from
Philadelphia, Longs" home town,
does not admit any other connection
Will LliC NSLENN4NC E2ANGDJ NlleAb llO4tS
visited him and confessed the work
he was engaged in-fraud, perjury
frame-up, all ordered by VIM. j
Burns.
Defense Wanted Mistrial.
A number of little details were
woven into the reports of the detec-
tive Long" to his superiors, or in
serted by them after the reports were
made, all creating a case by which
Sinclair and his co-defendant Fall
secretary of hte interior when the
fraudulent lease to Teapot Dome was
issued by him to Sinclair, could claim
mistrial. The governments decla-
ration of mistrial seems to have
.caught the Fall-Sinclair defense at
uorneys by surprise, but was well
coined by them, inasmuch as it was
part of their tactic anyway. They
made no very strong effort to pre-
vent the case being thrown out of
court, and new trial ordered.
Say Burns Used Fraud.
Among other things, Mcmillan, as
Long, signed reports requested by his
superiors, VIM. J. Burns, VIM. Sher-
man Burns, and "chief shadower"
Ruddy of the VIM. J. Burns Detective
Agency, which said that Juror Glass
cock was seen surreptitiously reading
newspaper during the progress of
the trial, an act which would have
justified the defense in asking for a
mistrial, as it was strictly against the
orders of the trial Judge.
Mcmillan now swears that this
part, as well as the rest of the re-
ports he signed and the affidavit used
by Burns, was mere fiction, that he
never saw Glasscock at all.
Much Mystery.
ut is admitted by all concerned,
Burns, Mcmillan, and District At
torney Gordon that there are many
rather peculiar features about the en-
tire history of MCMILLAN, but the dis
trict attorney denies that he, or Sim
clair's business rivals planted the de-
tective among Burns spies, and in
sisted that the first that was known
of him was when he came to Pinchot
and Pinchot relayed him over to the
government, which ordered him to
play along" with the Burns men.
The Fake Report.
Mcmillan says that few days af-
ter he was sent to Washington by
\ Burns he was told to bring his own
automobile to the city for VIM. J..
Burns to drive about in. He declares
he never did any spying on the jurors
at all, but wrote his reports to suit
Burns, under his direction. The re-
port on which the perjured affidavit
was based, and which was intended
as corroborative evidence supporting
the affidavit, is as follows:
Washington, D. c.
Saturday, Oct. %, 1927.
philadelphia investigator L-36.
1T ,ooQ'